Anyone with a Crystal Ball, Ring Me Up

Since last fall, we've all been watching the slow, torturous demise of the thriving general aviation industry in this country. You can cast blame at any number of mostly GOP cronies, greedy Wall Street golden boys and the ethically-challenged mortgage banking/credit card industry, but the fact still remains that GA is being killed by this recession.

We see daily news of plant closures, layoffs, so much bailout money flowing out of Washington, D.C. in numbers so big, We The People can't even keep track. While the traditional media is focused on the sad real estate and auto industry news and growing unemployment numbers, we aviators look for signs that the sky we love to fly across in indeed falling.

I personally had a couple of benchmarks I have been watching for to be my "canary in a coal mine" and signal a serious downturn, or, better put, a slippage of forward progress back to where we once were just a few months ago. One big news item that would have thrown up red flags would be any announcement of serious financial trouble at Cirrus Design, but thankfully that has not happened.

The other benchmark I have been watching for is any really awful news out of Cessna. Now everyone who reads World of Flying knows I am a Piper driver, but that is not because I do not like Cessnas. It is because our Cherokee 235 was $25,000 less than a comparably-equipped 182 Skylane with similar performance. Make no mistake, while Cirrus might have re-invented the four-passenger GA airplane, Cessna was there first. Ask Average Joe about a small plane they saw – any small plane – and they'll usually say it was "one of those Cessnas". The legend and legacy of Cessna is etched in GA's foundation, so it is horrible news to read news like this:

Cessna has decided to suspend production of its new eight-passenger Citation Columbus model, its largest business jet model. Cessna also plans to close a plant in Oregon that builds the Corvalis 350 and Corvalis 400 TT aircraft, moving that assembly line to the company's Independence, KS facility. Also planned are a total of about 2,300 more layoffs company-wide, according to Forbes.com.

Yes, you read that right. The Columbia plant that Cessna just picked up at fire-sale prices is being shuttered. These moves by the biggest GA benchmark of them all means more misery for our sector, nobody can dispute that. Just how bad the GA market is right now is anyone's guess, unless you're the CFO at one of these large manufacturers.

In this prize fight we are having to keep GA afloat in these troubled financial times, this Cessna news is a right cross directly on the jaw to every pilot, or anyone remotely related to general aviation. But we've proven a tough opponent, having taken hits like Adam and Eclipse while still remaining wobbly but upright.

Scan the web any day right now, and you'll get mixed signals. Yesterday, it was this news out of Cessna, and today it is Honda announcing they are delaying their sexy HondaJet's first flight of a production-conforming ship for a year, until January, 2010. But we also read that at EBACE next month, Daher-Socata will formally announce plans to invest $330 million to develop a new eight- to 10-seat twin-engine aircraft to offer in the market segment above its TBM 850 turboprop single. Add that to the news that Cirrus is ramping back up slowly and has not announced any delays in their Vision SF50 program, and we see – you got it – mixed signals all around.

How will this all shake out? Is Textron tiring of the losses at Cessna? And, is Cessna digging in for survival, or making the long-term moves required to sustain their brand? If this recession/depression continues too much longer, will we continue to see more suspended programs, more plant closings and additional layoffs? Who will be left in the market, and who will be toast?

All valid questions. One question however that none of us can answer is this: What will the GA industry look like as 2009 evolves into 2010? If you can answer that, pal, you really need to buy lotto tickets tonight.

Not Sure This Will "Fly" With the Authorities

My readers know I am all over the flying vehicles story, and so far the Terrafugia Transition has been the most exciting product in that arena.

And, I encourage others to attempt a jump into this horse race, although they might proceed with due caution as Team Terrafugia sure looks to have a big head start bringing their 'roadable airplane" to market.

But today I read about the High Road Aerocar being developed in sunny San Diego. The specs look promising, with 180 mph cruise, 20,000 ft, ceiling and IFR certification. But I cannot jump on their bandwagon until they remove the image from their web site of their Aerocar supposedly landing on a...ROAD!

Maybe it was a miscommunication between their web developer and their marketing team. Maybe it was an inside joke that did not get edited out of the first site drafts, who knows? And yes, the image could possible be an airport, or is that a road with an aircraft parked next to it? Confused? Me too. But one thing we do know is that if they are trying to sell the Aerocar as being legal to actually land on ROADS, I believe there might be a few County Mounties who will want a piece of that. Along with the U.S. Department of Transportation, the FAA, and all those people driving their kids to violin practice on some dude's RUNWAY!

So, no, I'll pass on any more coverage of the High Road Aerocar until this is taken down, changed and explained away. If that happens, I'll revisit coverage of their project, because the design – while similar to the Transition – is worthy of consideration.

And that thunderous roar you hear right now is the sound of 1,000 MIT students ROFL as they read this post.

ATC Survey Results It's a Lovefest!

After asking a number of pilots to take my ATC survey and examining the results, a pattern has emerged that do not find surprising. The vast majority of pilots give our Air Traffic Controllers high marks, with 77.7% assigning a grade of A- or better. In fact, nobody that took the survey gave ATC a grade lower than a B.

Let's take a stroll through results land, shall we? So who actually took the survey:

While 11% of those surveyed were student pilots, a full 55.5% are seasoned sticks, having flown between five and ten years. Just over 59% are private pilots, with 48.1% holding an instrument rating, 33.3 flying commercially, and 25.9% flying multi-engined ships. The results were split between the 51.8% that flies once a week or more, and the 40.7% that fly only occasionally.

So when these pilots launch, exactly what are they doing:

Just over 19% fly VFR and try to talk to ATC as little as they can get away with. But another group of VFR pilots makes up 46.2% of those surveyed, these are pilots who stay in close contact with ATC and request flight following on all flights. That leaves 34.6% that fly IFR, and obviously must be talking to ATC wheels up to wheels down.

Are the pilots who took the time to take the survey happy campers? You betcha:

The numbers are overwhelming here. A full 92.5% of the pilots are happy with ATC, and only 3.7% think ATC blames them for every mistake, no matter of the cause of the situation. A whopping 44.4% say ATC's service when VFR flight following is requested is "very good", and only 3.7% say that service is "poor". When a pilot needs assistance from ATC in finding the airport in low visibility conditions, 69.2 rate ATC's service as "good" to "very good". And when a pilot hears a garbled call from ATC and needs a "say again", 81.5% say they get what they want quickly and easily, with 11.1 calling service in this area "poor".

When asked how hard they think the job of ATC really is, the results were clear:

Just over 11% say that the job is incredibly hard, with one wrong move meaning people might die. But 81.5% say this is not a job for the faint of heart, and can only be learned after extensive training. And luckily (for the controllers), nobody selected the answer saying that "pushing tin is like flipping burgers, nothing to it." I am elated to read these particular results...they show a high level of respect for the job of Air Traffic Controller...and by relation an equal respect for the people doing that job.

If the pilots taking this survey were in charge of ATC personnel for a day, what exactly would they want to change:

I'm very happy that 81.5% of the pilots who took this survey say that negotiating a fair labor deal with FAA and hiring more controllers would be their first decision. And 40.7% have enough respect for Team ATC to say they would double their pay. But 29.6% say they would teach ATC to talk slower and be more compassionate to student pilots. One pilot said maybe ATC should reserve/assign a particular code or range of transponder codes to student pilots so controllers could be cued visually on their scopes that the aircraft is a student so they might speak more slowly when handling radio calls to those aircraft. Now that's an idea that might have legs.

Last, I asked the pilots to elaborate on what they'd like to see changed in ATC Land, and tell us anything they wanted ATC to see. Here is a sampling of some replies...and a few were LONG rants, that sort of went all over the map:

I was working on my instrument rating a few years ago, and I never once talked with ATC where they weren't wonderful. VFR, IFR it doesn't matter, they are the greatest!

Make Norcal Approach teach Chicago Approach how it's done. The rest of you are doing an absolutely fabulous job.

In case I haven't mentioned it - Chicago TRACON needs to get with the program. Every other facility I've dealt with has been professional, efficient, and abundantly helpful.

Frankly I think more pilots could use training on the services ATC is obligated to provide, versus what they "may" provide, workload permitting.

I think they are an amazing group of people and I would not want their job at any price.

My only problem has been understanding controllers who seem muffled and are talking quickly. I've only found this to happen at night.

The controllers do a great job. We face a very serious brain drain right now. The older controllers must stay to train their replacements. There should be incentives to maintain the controller workforce. A contract would be a good beginning.

I wish more ATC were pilots so they could have our perspective of different situations too.

So there it is, a report that ATC should be proud of. What I see here is lots of kudos for ATC, without any flames, with the exception being Chicago TRACON. They got mentioned many times in the comments of this survey...none of it good. But in such a complex system – one that has been under extreme duress of late – reading that we pilots generally are very happy with ATC is great news.

Now just imagine what love will be shared when these guys and gals get a new contract with FAA. Man, that would indeed be some seriously Friendly Skies.

GA Didn't Fail Me, the Starter Did

For days, I have been planning this California business trip, southbound via Katyliner for a pair of client photo shoots. Unlike flight via the scheduled carriers, I was elated to be able to pack far more photo gear than I usually take. The IFR flight plan was filed even though the weather was clear and million all the way into FAT...just for practice.

We arrived at the hanger early, and Katy's pre-flight went smooth. With "Andy" – our PT Cruiser, yes all the family vehicles have names – safely stowed in the barn and everything loaded in 27W, we were ready for liftoff precisely on schedule.

Master switch on, primer five strokes, electric fuel pump on, and turn the key. I watched a couple of blades pass by the windscreen, and then heard an expensive sound coming from the front of the plane, as if some kid had whacked the spinner with a sledgehammer. At that moment, the prop stopped its smooth clockwise rotation and a loud grinding noise forced it to an immediate halt. I didn't need a rocket scientist on board to know this wasn't good.

When I exited the plane and looked inside the front of the cowl, the "nose" of the starter was poking out from where it was jammed between the flywheel starter gear and the bottom cowl. There were a number of flywheel teeth that were damaged, and small bits of broken pinion gear were lying on the taxiway. Frustrated because (a) I knew this was going to be an expensive repair and (b) the flight was at this point canceled, I began to initiate whatever Plan B we could develop instantly.

My A/P showed up almost immediately, and confirmed the plane was down for a while. But with plenty of preparations already completed for the two California photo shoots, Plan B surely would mean one of us – uh, that would be me, camera guy – had to quickly buy a ticket on any carrier that could haul me to FAT in time for my 6P photo gig with the Fresno Grand Opera. We quickly consolidated my four bags of photo gear into two carry-ons and a roller, and headed off to receive the bad news at the United ticket counter. What we found when we got there was really disappointing:

The airlines must have large committees of people these days who have one task in life - create a business model that makes no sense at times. Yes, they had a seat, and yes, they'ed be more than happy to sell it to me...for $666 round trip. Oh wait, that price did not include the $30 ticket counter fee for not buying the seat online...or the $15 for checking the roller. So make that $711...my penalty for buying the empty seat on the day of the flight. But if I hadn't bought that seat, United would have made $0 because no ass was occupying that skinny seat. So here's an idea, instead of CHARGING ME MORE as a way of slapping me around and punishing me for not buying three weeks in advance, they should have been THANKING ME for taking that previously empty seat off their hands!

It boggles the mind how commercial carriers are really good at making a flight on their line so unpleasant at times. No, not all scheduled airline flights are awful, once in a while they actually surprise the cattle in back with a no squawker. But wait...there's more:

Frustrated, and with the clock ticking, I ask the could-not care-less Gate Agent that if I walk 30 feet to the waiting area, log into the EUG airport's free wi-fi and buy the ticket at UAL.com, I could avoid the $30 penalty for making him suffer through a couple of keystrokes. He says yes, so I do that, and their system reports "no seats available"...which now makes me freak a little because in my haste to trying to avoid the "Ticket Purchase Extortion Fee", I might have lost the seat. I run back to the counter – tail between legs – and pay their stupid thirty bucks and get the seat. But in the bizarro world of the friendly skies, I still have to go over to the kiosk and check-in. As I select "no, continue" to FOUR offers to upgrade everything from my legroom to the lavatory experience – double-ply ass wipe, $12.95...click here – I get my boarding passes. Maybe it's just me, but for the extra $30 clams they just robbed me of, don't you think the dude could have gone that extra mile and CHECKED ME IN TOO????

So, new starter is on order, and Katy is happy to be the recipient of a new Kelly Aerospace lightweight e-Drive starter. I guess this is the price of aircraft ownership. And while these kinds of repairs are never easy to swallow, bottom line is that I still own a wonderful private plane, and in this economy, that's saying something.

That Voice in Your Headset
Wants to Hear From You

Take the survey here

It is no secret that I have a large following of NATCA Air Traffic Controllers on this blog. One of them works at the EUG tower where we base the family Cherokee 235, and has been quite a good email buddy of late.

One night last week, he gave me an idea that I'm running with. In our conversation about what peeves air traffic controllers, he said it would be very helpful if he and his fellow controllers could hear from the pilots they serve. He said it would be helpful and wasn't afraid to hear the good AND bad of what we pilots think.

Based on that conversation, I have created a quick, easy and (I hope) entertaining Surveymonkey survey that asks 10 questions about what you think about the service you receive from that voice in your headset. The entire survey takes only a couple of minutes to complete, and it is completely anonymous, so flame away of you so choose.

But while some of you are flaming, I sincerely hope others will tell ATC with your answers about the good service you receive.

Take the survey here

I will be leaving this survey up for several days so we can get a good sampling of pilot's opinion. I will then post the results here, and also forward your answers to Doug Church, NATCA's national media contact.

So please go here and complete the survey...I am thanking you in advance.

An 'Alternative Model' That Just Makes Sense

It is no surprise that when Eclipse went down in bankruptcy, you could just about bet that anyone with an aviation charter or taxi model based on the Eclipse 500 VLJ was sure to be a casualty as well. The first and largest was Dayjet, who suspended operations in September, 2008.

Now aviationweek.com and other sources are reporting that another aviation business model built around the Eclipse VLJ has thrown in the towel:

"After devoting several years to market analysis, equipment evaluation, pricing structures, service areas and operational planning, Robert Crandall has decided to ground Pogo, his start up very light jet charter operation, before it ever left the ground. He says he's returning what remains of the operation's seed money to investors. Although Pogo was usually described as an "air taxi," Crandall dismissed that label, saying, "I don't know what that means." Rather, he described the intended service as a typical FAR135 charter operation using small jets with trips confined to the northeastern United States. The group had considered several jets, but seemed finally to settle on the Eclipse 500, primarily for its low acquisition and operating costs. However, Eclipse declared bankruptcy earlier this year after delivering fewer than 300 aircraft."

I'm saddened to see Pogo become Nogo, because I thought of all the various VLJ-based air taxi operations that sprang up out of nowhere, Crandall's Pogo had the most chance at success. Say what you will about today's American Airlines, but there can be no debate that as the Chief of that legacy carrier, Crandall learned a few things about selling aircraft travel services to humans.

In the aviationweek.com piece, Crandall makes this prediction about what is next for commercial aviation:

"You're going to see a lot of alternative models emerge in aviation" because with the continuing contraction of airline service, "it's getting harder and harder to go from Point A to B in the United States. There is a market out there for alternative models that will save people time," Crandall said."

I'm going to agree with Crandall on the need for business people to re-think how they fly privately. One way that I think is gaining new value is aircraft co-ownership, not unlike the same set-up that the guys in the hangar next to you have in that four-way they maintain in a Skyhawk.

Yes, there are fractional deals out there, and jetcards too. Both have merit and can be a good bargain. But one of the most logical methods I know of to cut costs of private business air travel is to own a piece of a Pilatus PC-12. Anyone who knows the PC-12 knows the wide range of capabilities this amazing aircraft has. I know of quite a few people across the land who are teaming up in a Pilatus to save money and still have access to a very good ship that is seriously cheaper to operate than the vast majority of business jets. My two cents:

While fractional deals may be cool, now and wow, maybe this "alternative model" that Crandall speaks of is really just an old school way of aircraft ownership...the multi-owner deal. Four companies, each buying a piece of a nice, fast, pressurized business aircraft made in Switzerland, a plane that is in a management program providing professional crews, maintenance and ground services. To the executive, they still show up on the ramp, ride in a luxurious leather seat, sip the beverage of his/her choice and go where business demands, on his/her own schedule.

The only difference is that it costs far, far less than having your own flight department. For full disclosure, I have warmed up to this model big time since I have a client who currently arranges just this type of deal for PC-12 owners, and then manages the aircraft for those owners. I have seen this model work up close and personal, and it is a deal that just makes sense...for the owners, for the passengers, for the CFO, for everyone.

WAI's Laboda on Aero-TV

I have always been a big proponent of women flying - and believe the skies should be open to anyone of any gender, race, ethnicity, etc. who has a desire to fly.

It's like this: The airplane will not know the difference if a women or a man is at the controls, unless of course there is a super gentle touch, then chances are pretty good it's a woman!

Women flying is GA's secret weapon to achieve growth. With such a small percentage of licensed pilots being female, they represent the best chance we have to boost pilot numbers.

If you want to hear about women's contributions to aviation, there is no better source out there than Women in Aviation International's Amy Laboda. I have been reading her bylines for years, and now Aero-News Network's Aero-TV has put up a great interview with Amy.

Please take a minute to go here and watch Amy's interview, and then go find a woman you know and take her flying.

You Never Forget Your First

There is one thing all new instrument pilots must know: At some point – usually right after you get your rating – you will come face to face with the The Beast...that frozen monster we know as clear, rime or mixed ice. Your task as an IFR stick is to know how to avoid this confrontation, but when The Beast sneaks up on you, then knowing what to do really becomes a matter of life and death.

As I write this, I am smiling, knowing I am as yet undefeated in these battles with en route ice. Yes, of course I will have more encounters, but after surviving this first one, I know that the next one will have a safe outcome...as long as I follow the procedures drilled into my brain by my CFI-I, Jim Hunt of Eugene.

Here is how this weekend's encounter with icing came down:

We had departed Medford, Oregon after a day of lollygagging in Ashland, home of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. If you are arts patrons like Julie and myself – and if you love live theater like we do – then Ashland might be considered almost sacred ground. We strolled, shopped and ate, then headed back to Medford Air Service in their very nice crew van. Skies overheard were broken but going scattered, plenty of blue poking through the gray. Looking north, I could see more of the same, so I filed for 8,000 msl and blasted off IFR.

So far so good. We had just came southbound a few hours earlier, and even though the freezing level was hovering close to our cruising altitude, we did not get any ice in and out of the clouds at 7,000 msl...

Level at 8,000, those broken going scattered clouds all decided they wanted to become one, and soon we found ourselves in a solid layer. My OAT gauge read about -2C, so I immediately knew this wasn't good. My CFI-I taught me to always be considering my options, so when I saw accumulations of ice building fairly rapidly on the stem rising up from the OAT just above my side of the windscreen, Plan B was initiated. I had been prepared for a return to MFR and already had the ILS 14 plate on the yoke, a good plan it turns out. As calmly as possible, I instructed my pax that I'd made a decision and we were immediately returning to MFR. I quickly asked Cascade for and got a 180 turn, with a descent ASAP.

O.K., I had made the right call, this I realized as the windscreen almost instantly loaded up with ice by the time I had finished initiating my 180. So on my very first IFR flight with a passenger (or without), I drew on my training and kept my focus where it belonged:

Yeah, it sort of creeps you out when you can't see a damned thing out of the windscreen. And it didn't help that Cascade vectored me around some northbound departing traffic. But my training was superb – attitude, altitude, scan, scan, scan – just keep your head in the game and trust your instruments. Soon, we descended to under 6,000 and the ice quickly melted away, and we made a non-event VFR landing back where we had started. With lowering conditions, we ended up with an RON (remain overnight) at a nice hotel, and flew back IFR today in between layers, moderate turbulence, major-league quartering winds aloft, and a full-on ILS back to EUG. But...no icing.

This bout with ice in flight was an eye opener on many levels. First, I now know how fast it can accumulate, and secondly, I'm convinced that my skills at knowing when ice MIGHT be up there are as sharp as they need to be.

But most importantly, I know my IFR training as a student of Jim Hunt was right on. I knew what to look for, and what to do when I met up with ice. I was able to fly out of the situation without making some grave mistake, and I was prepared with a perfect "Plan B" as an out. I do not believe I have sufficiently said thank you to Jim in public for preparing me to achieve this huge rating, so consider this post to be those kudos for a job well done.

Because had Jim been sloppy, or if he had glossed over how serious icing can be en route, or if he hadn't been the occasional hardass when my skills went rusty, there is a possibility that this encounter could have been much different.

Thank God the Monkeys Lived

Today, those interested in all things space celebrate the 50th anniversary of manned space flight, or at least 50 years since the first NASA presser was held:

From Space.com: They were seven men, all military pilots, in peak physical shape with above average IQs. They were college educated and men of faith and family. And they were America's first "astronaut volunteers." Announced to the press at 2:00 p.m. on April 9, 1959 in Washington, DC, M. Scott Carpenter, L. Gordon Cooper, John H. Glenn, Virgil "Gus" Grissom, Walter M. Schirra, Alan B. Shepard and Donald "Deke" Slayton immediately rocketed into history as heroes, two years before any of them would leave the ground for space.

From our space program's wonder years when we strapped actual humans instead of monkeys inside exotic flaming cylinders and blasted them towards Andromeda, we mere mortals have been fascinated with space travel. And when you think about how many billions of years our universe has been around, it seems like magic that we've gone from Mercury to Virgin Galactic in just half a century:

"Virgin Galactic expects to be the first company to provide sub-orbital flights to the general public. We will launch as soon as possible, but only when we are happy with the results of the exhaustive WhiteKnightTwo and SpaceShipTwo test flight program. The test flight program for WhiteKnightTwo is already successfully underway and that of SpaceShipTwo is expected to begin after the summer."

There can be no disputing the fact that Branson and Virgin are out front in the quest to be the first (and best) company to offer public space travel. This is the case because of what we find on the Virgin website:

"Virgin Galactic is the only company with the rights to Burt Rutan's design and technology, proven by SpaceShipOne, which is unrivaled in its potential to give passenger astronauts a fabulous experience, safely."

Yes, Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites is certainly a card you want in your hand if you are pushing to start charging people money to launch them into space. I have always been a huge fan of anything Rutan and Scaled builds, and have written before about how his lectures on the oncoming wave of commercial space travel seem like he is writing the rulebook for this next phase of aviation.

Of course you know that Scaled's team of engineers have built SpaceShipOne, and GlobalFlyer, and Voyager, just to name three mega-success stories from Team Rutan. But I'll bet you've never heard of some of the lesser-known designs that have been born in Scaled's Mojave, CA Skunkworks:

Proteus is a twin turbofan high altitude multi-mission aircraft powered by Williams International FJ44-2E engines. It is designed to carry payloads in the 2000-pound class to altitudes above 60,000 feet and remain on station up to 14 hours.

The Model 133-4.62 Advanced Technology Tactical Transport (ATTT) proof-of-concept demonstrator is a 62% scaled version of an airplane designed to challenging STOL and long range requirements. The ATTT was developed and test flown by Scaled Composites, Inc. under contract to DARPA.

The Roton is a reusable, single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) space vehicle designed by Rotary Rocket to transport up to 7000 lbs to and from low earth orbit. The Roton is conical in shape, 22 feet (6.7 meters) in diameter at the base, and about 63 feet (19.2 meters) tall. The Roton deploys the rotor system to provide a controlled gliding approach to the landing site.

The ARES, Scaled Model 151, was designed initially in response to a U.S. Army request for a Low Cost Battlefield Attack Aircraft (LCBAA). It also was designed around a 30mm chain gun. Its mission goals were low-altitude, close air support, with long endurance, and with adequate field performance to operate from roads. The ARES first flew on February 19, 1990, with Scaled test pilot Doug Shane at the controls. Since that first flight, the ARES has flown more than 250 hours, and demonstrated all of its design performance and handling qualities goals, including departure-free handling at full aft stick.

The Raptor Demonstrator high altitude long endurance UAV program began with a contract award from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to Scaled Composites on June 5, 1992. In order to reach altitudes of 65,000 ft, the Raptor used a two-stage turbocharged, 100 hp, highly modified Rotax engine.

The all-composite Triumph, an 8500-lb, 41,000-ft capable, pressurized 8-seat corporate aircraft, was designed around the then-unflown Williams FJ-44 turbofan engine. In 1988, Scaled performed the first flight of the Triumph, which was also the first flight tests of the FJ-44. Our subsequent test program, which consisted of over 100 hours of flight tests, confirmed the performance and operating characteristics of both the engines and the airplane.

VisionAire Vantage - In early 1993, Jim Rice and Tom Stark of the fledgling VisionAire Corporation visited Scaled Composites with conceptual designs for a new single-engine business jet. Under a $2.5 million fixed-price contract, Scaled rolled out the Vantage to a large group of customers and press just 8 months later (8 November), and performed a picture-perfect first flight on 16 November.

I consider myself lucky to have watched the VisionAire Vantage do a flight demonstration at AOPA Expo in Palm Springs in the mid-90s. What dropped the crowd almost to their knees in disbelief was the supernatural slow flight characteristics of the Vantage. Had it been a drag race with a J3, I'm guessing the Piper would have won. And from that dirty, low and slow pass, the Vantage went wheels up and full thrust, blasting off at light speed as if monkeys were strapped inside headed off to Mars.

Yes, we've come a long ways from Mercury to today. What is out there around the corner in space travel is anyone's guess. But we can be reasonably sure it will involve high rolling whales with serious disposable coin chatting it up with flight attendants in tight-fitting space suits as they sip on flutes of 2000 Perrier-Jouet Belle Epoque somewhere between here and Mars.

Rutan says commercial space flight will do to global travel what the 747 did to intercontinental travel in 1970. I think he's right that since then, there has not been a significant leap ahead on aviation of that importance. He equates the leap we took forward with the -47 to the leap we took forward with the DC-3. And, he says commercial space flight will be that next big thing coming to a sky near you.

I will predict here for the first time that at 52 years old, I might be able to actually envision myself being in space before I "Go West" to fly with Lindbergh and Papa Louie. But they had better figure out a way to get the price down to everyman's range, 'cause this space passenger won't be paying out six figures to leave these surly bonds, with or without monkeys and champagne.

Paper Airplanes

Lots of my readers know I am in a Toastmasters International Club here in Eugene. I go to their weekly meetings to improve my public speaking and communication skills, and in the 3.5 years in this organization, I have went from wallflower to being in command of the lectern. If you have ever freaked out at the thought of speaking before an audience, then you are like the majority of the public that gets queasy at the thought of a room full of people hanging on your every word.

TM is not like many service groups, because the only service it performs is to improve the speaking skills of its members. There is no time requirements outside of our weekly meetings, and even those are not mandatory. I bring this all up because it is this group that I speak to the most about flying:

As I work through the TM program, there are numerous manuals each with five speeches in them, with each speech designed to teach the speaker a new skill. We are encouraged to craft these speeches about things we know, and of course, if its Av8rdan, it must be airplanes. My club member friends have patiently sat through well over 10 speeches I have given that had some sort of aviation topic. They sat artificially mesmerized when watching the speech I made that taught "communicating on television"...in which I videotaped myself explaining the many details of performing a pre-flight inspection on a Cessna 172. From the looks on their bored faces, I think I lost them at "open the door, turn ON the Master Switch blah blah blah."

Yes, I have given speeches on non-aviation topics, but they are few and far between. In TM, it is not the topic that matters, it is the delivery of that topic. So if I want to ramble on about the TSA LASP program, or Jerrie Mock and her famous Cessna 180, or how IFR training is really REALLY hard, my fellow TM'ers sit there and take it like troopers.

Frankly, I thought they had about enough of Dano's airplane crap long ago. So even though we always make a big deal about the personal accomplishments of members, I had not planned tonight to tell the club I earned my IFR rating on 03.26.09. I did mention it to one of our more vocal members, and I guess that was enough to spark this:

Tonight, we had a quite unique meeting, in which two members both gave speeches that were cooking demonstrations. As the meeting was wrapping up, Janice – who is a 10-year TM member, soon-to-be published author and part-time stand-up comic – called me to the lectern. She had me tell the club about my rating, and I welcomed the applause. After the roar of the crowd subsided and she presented me with a crazy card and a couple of very cool gifts, she said "oh, and we have one more thing for you." What followed was a coordinated display of paper airplane aerobatics as all 15 or so members pulled out at least two paper airplanes each and hurled them towards me! Of course, being paper airplanes, none of them went where they were intended to go, because as we all know, paper airplanes have minds of their own.

To see the meeting room fill with the color and spectacle of 20-30 paper airplanes going every which way in my honor was one of the coolest things to happen to me in some time. These folks are my friends, and damned near my family too. I've seen many of them each Tuesday for over three years, and I am blessed to be a part of their club.

And it is so very cool that they recognized my accomplishment. Now, back to writing that next speech. Wonder what the topic will be. Oh, wait, I've got it:

Papyrus Flying Machines and Their Erratic Navigational Guidance Systems.

Heck yes, bet your farm I can make up 5 - 7 minutes of spiel on that.

Pushing Tin on Your iPhone

I write at length on this blog about the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) and how they've been given a raw labor deal by FAA. One of the main issues that always comes up in their press releases about this mess is that due to a lack of trained controllers, NATCA members must work long, tiring hours which can lead to an increase in the possibility of an incident.

Apparently, training new controllers is a grueling, complex process. The learning curve is huge, the responsibility high. In the tower's cab or deep within the bowels of an ARTCC is no place for a rookie to operate. If only there was a better, faster and more entertaining way to train new controllers...oh wait, there is, according to ANN:

"A brand-new iPhone application from Firemint gives users a taste of what it’s like to work as an air traffic controller, sequencing and directing aircraft in your airspace to safe landings. The "playing field" is an overhead view of an airport traffic area. As aircraft enter your airspace, you are to direct their flight path to a runway for landing: airliners to the long runway, small planes to the short runway, and helicopters to the helipad. The game starts out on a fairly simple level, but of course things quickly get more challenging as the amount of air traffic on your screen soon increases dramatically. The game ends with the first mid-air collision."

The Firement site pretty much spells out one element of this game that ought to come with a warning. It calls the game "wickedly addictive" and that claim is solidified in the ANN piece:

"I downloaded this game a week ago, and I still keep coming back to try to get a new high score," Cnet blog author Jason Parker wrote. "Flight Control is both incredibly challenging and very addicting, and definitely worth the 99 cent price tag."

In playing the game myself, I found it to live up to its addictive promise. Each game starts out very benign, a jet or two inbound, maybe a rogue helicopter, and some bozo in his J3 invading your Class Bravo. You easily aim them at the runway ends and the helipad, but as they are following orders from ATC (actually you drag your finger across the screen to simulate their proposed routing), a few more targets enter your sector. You work them, but now two, no THREE helicopters are inbound! And remember that clown in the J3? Now his buddy in a Cessna 310 and two dudes in trainers are trying to get tangled up with more pressurized tubes full of Grandmas and a UPS Heavy.

Your pulse races, your heart pounds. As the targets converge, their blips pulsate red, a mid-air is imminent. Your fingers cannot go fast enough - more converging targets...now who's that idiot in the %$#@!&*% BLIMP!!!!! And then...BAM, that crashing noise you hear on the iPhone is the sound of a United, a Northwest, a medivac chopper and a Cessna 150 all colliding in a ball of fire, smoke and vaporized tray tables. Sorry pal, Game Over.

Play this game for a little while, and then imagine yourself hunched over a real ATC radar screen, with REAL targets full of REAL humans converging. I believe it will increase the respect you should have for NATCA's member controllers, who have to do this stuff for REAL every day.

Because in their world, when you hear that crashing noise, it's not just a sound effect coming our of the palm of your hand...and there is no game reset button.

Just What is All This IFR Stuff Anyway?

I have just completed filing my first official IFR flight plan as an instrument-rated pilot. Those aviators who know me and know my addiction to aviation will know what that means. It means this is real now, the training is over. It is on me and not the CFI to keep myself and my passengers out of a future NTSB report.

Pilots who read this blog already know about flying IFR in IMC. My instrument-rated brethren have been down this road, they have studied for the written, stressed over the oral, white-knuckled their way through the check ride, and now fly regularly "in the system" as we clagg-rated guys like to say.

But I have numerous non-aviator readers, and one email this week asked why it is such a big deal to get this rating. He asked me what I'd do with it, and how it changes the way I will fly. So if you are a pilot, frequency changed approved to head off to the next blog or website. But if you are wondering what's the big deal about flying in the IFR system, let's me 'splain:

In our Federal airspace system, all aircraft generally share the same sky. The many shapes and sizes of flying machines are separated into two groups, those flying under "visual" flight rules (VFR), and those flying under "instrument" flight rules (IFR). The difference here is pretty obvious, a VFR pilot must maintain clear of clouds (the distance varies according to the type of airspace) so he/she can visually see other traffic. An IFR pilot can file an IFR flight plan, and then fly into the clouds completely by reference to the aircraft's instruments, so long as he/she flies an exact route as specified in the flight's "clearance" from ATC.

It's that clearance that is the major difference between VFR and IFR. Away from the busier airspace that encircles large population centers (cities), you are pretty much allowed to go where you please, at any altitude you please while chasing down a $100 hamburger as a VFR flight. But as an IFR flight, ATC spells out in no uncertain terms what route and altitudes to fly. You are under "positive control" at all times, and if you let your pilotage get sloppy and drift off an airway, you can be sure to get a usually gentle nudge from ATC back to the centerline.

But here's where this gets all gets so very cool:

All commercial airline flights are by regulation conducted as IFR flights. ATC wants to know exactly where each and every pressurized tube full of Grandmas is located, and where it's going. This is required to provide "separation services" so nobody trades paint. When an airliner is given an IFR clearance, in layman's terms, you can visualize that route as a tube going through the sky. Each IFR flight has its tube, and NATCA's controllers are tasked with seeing that no two tubes converge into a fireball. But when I fly Katy – our family/business Cherokee 235 – we also get assigned an identical tube to fly through when cleared IFR. With me so far?

So as the Katyliner and an airliner are approaching a towered airport as IFR flights, we BOTH have identical priority. Since all IFR flights are sailing though these tubes that all end up at the runway threshold, it is the job of ATC to adjust the final approach courses to allow the traffic to smoothly flow back to the crust of this planet. As an IFR flight, I get to fly in the very same air as the guy flying the 'Big Iron', receiving the same separation. In a large metro area, this is a blessing, because ATC wants me where they want me, NOW. But as an VFR flight, I would be sent to the back of the line, served by ATC only after they are assured all IFR traffic is dealt with.

Yes, this priority IFR treatment is what I worked so hard for. Of course, I have nothing at all against those who chose to fly VFR, it is still a very cool way to fly. But as one pilot who always flew with flight following anyway, this rating will just take ATC services to the next level, caring for my flight wheels up to wheels down. I can now very easily fly right through the busiest of airspace, following ATC's instructions and flying a precision approach until I am right over the numbers.

And when it's 200 and 1/2, having your windscreen filled with the touchdown zone when you pop out of the soup is a good thing.