More 'painfully clear' brilliance from AOPA.

It's no secret that I'm one of – if not THE – biggest supporters of AOPA up here in the Pacific Northwest. The leadership they provide for the GA community is beyond vital, and without them fighting for us in Washington, D.C., the current crop of cronies running our country would simply have their way with us. It takes people like AOPA President Phil Boyer and his awesome team to get right up there in it and go toe-to-toe with the politicians who want to screw us with insane ideas like a 366 percent fuel tax increase and European-style user fees.

There is no better place to see just how tenacious AOPA is at fighting that fight then their wonderful website, which seems to get better by the day. And one of the finest things I've seen in a while on aopa.org is AOPA's “Tax Increase Calculator”, which will quickly tell you how much more it will cost to fly your particular aircraft if Bush's FAA user fee/tax increase scheme becomes law. With AOPA's permission, I'm offering the calculator here:


Make sure you click the "Learn More" link when you get to the results screen.

Jeff Coffey, AOPA's VP - ePublishing, is one of their team members who is doing some great work. Coffey offers this as the reason why AOPA spent the time developing this complex Flash tool for their site:

AOPA's ePublishing group is responsible for the AOPA.org home page and the creation of the calculator. Our goal was to make the implications of the FAA's proposed funding solution more "real" for our members. Our hope is that the calculator makes it painfully clear how the proposed tax increase could directly affect each one of us.

As I have said many, many times recently, this topic should be front and center in the minds of every pilot, future student pilot or anyone who has a business that sells stuff to pilots and aircraft owners. I may choose to leave this up for a while to get AOPA maximum exposure, so please copy/paste the following URL into your email and send it to everyone you know:


If this garbage FAA funding reauthorization bill actually becomes law as currently written, it will rip the heart out of every pilot that is living today, steal away the dreams of those kids who have yet to hang on their first airport fence, and insult the aviators of our past who are now off hangar flying with Lindy and Doolittle.

We can't let that happen.

UPDATE 040407@815A: The response to this post has been tremendous, and since I will be on the road 4/4 - 4/10 (and my housesitter doesn't do 'puters or blogging), I'm going to go ahead and leave this post up while I am traveling. If you've seen it before, please check back after 4/10 when fresh content will again go up daily. And don't forget, the GA community needs you to pass this post around so people can see the AOPA tax increase calculator -dp.

Clever, very clever.

If you're in the vicinity of Seattle on the eighth of July this summer, you'll absolutely have to head out to the Boeing plant in Everett to take the public's first look at a fully assembled 787 Dreamliner.

Reuters in the U.K. is reporting that Boeing has scheduled the unveiling conveniently for 07.08.07 to further draw attention to their very popular midsized airliner of the future. MSNBC looks to be one of the first MSM outlets to pick up the story over on this side of the pond.

Just how popular is the Dreamliner? It appears to be the brightest of spots in Boeing's order book, and is helping them to the top of the airliner manufacturing mountain:

The first test flight of the 787 is planned for late August. The first delivery of the plane, which is sold out until 2013, is scheduled for May 2008. Fueled by demand for the 787, Boeing topped EADS-unit Airbus in new plane orders in 2006 -- the first time Boeing bested its rival since 2000.

The Rueters report says the 787 has racked up roughly $70 billion in orders in about three years on the market, and if you do a quick search for “787 Dreamliner” on The Google's news search engine, you can't miss numerous stories about more orders flowing in for the drop-dead gorgeous plane.

As I've said before, the first time I get to ride in a 787 will be a very, very special day for this aviator.

A Flying Machine
Al Gore Would Love.

My regular readers know I live in Eugene, Oregon, chosen recently as the “Greenest City in the Country, by Greenguide.com, a site that knows about these things. Eugene is as much a way of thinking as it is a way of life, and the vast majority of our residents – myself included – are politically progressive, socially tolerant, and environmentally conscious. I'm willing to bet anyone we have the largest per capita collection of VW busses anywhere, and with something like 72 MILES of wide, lit bike highways (with underpasses under the big cross streets), you can actually get somewhere safely on two wheels.

Eugene is a very hip place, much like Berkeley was in the 60s-70s or Greenwich Village still is today. All the hippies who came here decades ago to worship the Grateful Dead and refine their free spirits stayed and have made this little corner of the world a peaceful, clean and green place. Here, people don't recycle because they HAVE to, they do it because they WANT to.

So it was with great enthusiasm that I read the following from a recent Boeing press release:

MADRID, March 27, 2007 -- In an effort to develop environmentally progressive technologies for aerospace applications, Boeing researchers and industry partners throughout Europe plan to conduct experimental flight tests this year of a manned airplane powered only by a fuel cell and lightweight batteries. A fuel cell is an electrochemical device that converts hydrogen directly into electricity and heat without combustion. Fuel cells are emission-free and quieter than hydrocarbon fuel-powered engines. They save fuel and are cleaner for the environment.

Man, dig that, a green flying machine. Now, I'm not an expert on fuel cell technology, but not having to pay $4.00 and up for 100LL would sure be nice. As of today, this is what power by fuel cell can mean in the air:

The demonstrator aircraft is a Dimona motor glider, built by Diamond Aircraft Industries of Austria, which also performed major structural modifications to the aircraft. With a wing span of 53.5 feet, the airplane will be able to cruise at approximately 62 miles per hour using fuel cell-provided power for the cruise phase of flight. During takeoff and climb, the flight segment that requires the most power, the system draws on lightweight lithium-ion batteries.

According to Francisco Escarti, BR&TE managing director of Boeing Research and Technology - Europe who is conducting the testing, don't expect to see a fuel-cell powered Dreamliner any time soon:

"While Boeing does not envision that fuel cells will provide primary power for future commercial passenger airplanes, demonstrations like this help pave the way for potentially using this technology in small manned and unmanned air vehicles." "It also gives us hands-on experience to complement other fuel-cell studies being carried out throughout the company."

You can twist the global warming debate any way you wish, or if you live on the right side of the aisle, you can lie yourself into believe the threat doesn't exist. But for the love of God, I cannot figure out why anyone would argue that having cleaner air is a bad thing...unless maybe you own a big honkin' factory that generates obscene profits while belching out deadly chemicals. Then it makes good business sense to have cronies in high places...like the EPA.

Will we see fuel cell power in a Cessna in the next few years? Don't hold your breath. I think we'll see small turbines make a move into the GA world before that ever happens. When you can hang 75 pounds of hardware out front and burn Jet A in your 172TP (turbine powered), cruising 30 knots faster while carrying 200 pounds more payload, that's when the future of GA will have truly arrived.

This is so
very cool.

Wes Cobb, who blogs under the name of vfrstudent, has a post up now about a very cool online logbook called Logshare. It is loaded with features that will do everything from output charts and graphs to break down your hours in a zillion different ways, or remind you when your IFR or VFR currency or medical is coming due.

I have spent literally hours online in the past couple of years looking for precisely this kind of online logbook. I would have paid money to use it, but Logshare is...free. Don't even ask me how people can put the major-league time and talent into creating this kind of comprehensive site and then give it away, as a website developer myself, this boggles the mind.

Here is what you will find at the Logshare site:

Tired of whipping out the calculator every time you need to tally up a page in your logbook? Isn't it a pain going back through pages of scribbled logbook entries just to figure out if you're current? Keeping track of your flying is important business for many reasons, and the old-fashioned written logbook isn't very helpful when it comes time to use it productively. LogShare alleviates you of these common issues by using technology to simplify your life as a pilot. Need to know if you're IFR current? Now you're one click away. Want to know how much flying you did this year for business? Again, one click. This powerful application makes it extremely easy to do all this and more.

I will most certainly sign up and try really really hard to log my flights and utilize all the power that this site offers. However, I know how screwy the Internets can all be, every last one of them. So I will always keep my paper logbook going too, since that is what the CFI signs off in. Because we all know that the one constant in cyberspace is that there is no constant, and a great website here today might be gone tomorrow.

Having said that, I wish Logshare and the people behind it the best. Live long and prosper...it works for me.

Airliners built
in China?

With the news last week out of Shanghai, China that national leaders have approved a program to build large commercial aircraft, one has to immediately wonder what that news could mean to Boeing and Airbus:

It's being reported that China is expected to buy 2,230 new planes between now and 2025. They've apparently got a plan to start test flying large aircraft by 2020 along with producing its own aircraft engines. Estimates vary widely on how much the Chinese airliner market is worth, but generally, articles out there put the number at between $180 and $349 billion USD.

Regular readers of WoF know I am often brutal on Chinese products and hold a great deal of distain for the big box stores in the U.S. that sell their goods. So much of the Wally World stuff America is addicted to is below par in quality, meant to last just about long enough for you to swipe your card and get the box home. I'd love to say that Chinese airliners might be of the same quality as a $39.99 color television, but it is technically possible that they could build a pressurized flying tube to haul people that would not fall apart in mid-air.

Like it our don't, our world has become a true global economy. A toaster sold in Fresno is designed in Karachi using software engineered in Germany, thrown together in China using Malaysian parts, then shipped in a Liberian container ship to be sold at a chain of mondo-marts HQ'ed in Bentonville, Arkansas. And when the toast burns 'cause the piece o'crap breaks, tech support is provided by some clown in India who wants very much for you to believe he's actually “Bob” in Buffalo.

What will a Chinese airliner look like? That is a question only time will answer. But the one thing that is perfectly clear is this: If a comparable airliner made in Everett, Washington by Boeing sells worldwide for say $100 million, you can bet Wally World will be blowing out the Chinese versions in stores nationwide for $24,997.56. That's after their “price chopper” has “slashed” the price to just pennies over the actual cost of manufacturing the plane in the first place.

If I owned lots of stock in Boeing, would I be concerned about this? No. China is but one market on this planet, and I think the 787 Dreamliner will revolutionize commercial aviation in a way that the DC-3 did generations ago. I do not believe there is a chance that the Chinese will build as plane as efficient and cost-effective – or as drop-dead gorgeous – as the 787, so the market for Boeing products in Shanghai will still be there. I might be way wrong on that, but since we won't know for maybe 15 YEARS, it's a pretty safe bet that Boeing and Airbus will watch the emerging Chinese maket carefully and if they feel threatened, they'll adjust their product lines to fill any gaps left open by the Chinese makers.

A disaster
in the making.

Nobody is on top of the fight against Bush's massive 366 percent GA fuel tax increase and user fee scheme any better then AOPA...with the possible exception of NBAA, who is making plenty of noise too. And in trying to sort this garbage out, we banter around lots of awful “what if” scenarios, trying to figure out what this monster of a proposal will do to GA and business aviation if it actually becomes law. But as much as we like to think we know how really bad user fees could be, trust me, we really haven't a clue.

Until now.

Thanks to the extremely thorough reporting from AOPA's Thomas Horne, we now can get a look deep into the dark underbelly of the horrific user fees that GA pilots in Europe must endure just to poke holes in the sky. Horne recently went to Europe and rode along on a typical 350 NM IFR flight from London's Biggin Hill Airport to Egelsbach Airport, near Frankfurt-Main International Airport in Germany. He made the flight with Jan Brill, editor in chief of Germany's Pilot und Flugzeug Magazine, and photographer Mark Wagner on Brill's 1964 Piper Twin Comanche.

This article – found in the latest AOPA Pilot Magazine – is absolutely REQUIRED READING for any pilot, any future flight student, or anyone who manufactures or sells stuff that pilots and airplane owners use. This request from me is not open to debate, you absolutely must go here and read Horne's article, because if this doesn't scare the holy crap out of you, then you don't deserve to call yourself an aviator.

I'm not going to steal AOPA's thunder on this, so just follow this link and read the entire article, including Horne's sidebar on the Euro-fees. There is also an AOPA video of the flight here. After you are finished, PASS THE LINK BELOW TO AS MANY FRIENDS AS YOU CAN (copy and paste the following URL into an email and forward):

http://www.aopa.org/pilot/features/2007/feat0704.html

We need to band together and get maximum coverage for AOPA on this article...it will open a lot of eyes, and shock any pilot who reads it. I am serious, we need to daisy-chain this article, force your buddies to read it, shove it in their face if you have to, leave it in the break room at work, email it all over the country...this is MANDATORY!!!

Major
Restructuring
at Columbia
Aircraft

Aero-News Network is all over the story breaking out of Bend, Oregon this week, explaining that just two weeks after Columbia Aircraft Manufacturing laid off 59 workers, now Bing Lantis has resigned as Chief Executive Officer of the planemaker. Columbia has also announced the temporary furlough of 185 employees, in order to give the company the opportunity to “refine production and more aggressively pursue Lean Manufacturing and Lean Enterprise processes improvements.”

This restructuring comes on the heels of a series of blows that Columbia took last year. From ANN:

As Aero-News reported earlier this month, Columbia laid off approximately 10 percent of its workforce, in an attempt to curb the effects from a series of financial roundhouses the company took in 2006. Despite achieving record sales and deliveries for the year, the company was also hit with a six-month certification delay for its Garmin G1000 glass panel installation. Just over two months after that certification was achieved, the planemaker was hit with a freak June hailstorm that necessitated the refinishing of more than 60 aircraft parked on the ramp, awaiting delivery.

The remaining 335 employees at Columbia will continue to deliver customer aircraft at the normal rate of four aircraft per week, which should be welcome news to anyone with a deposit in their order book.

I have to say, of all the layoffs we've seen over the years when so many deplorable companies shipped their jobs offshore, it gives me great pleasure to say that Columbia is not one of them. They seem to be doing this restructuring in a very classy way:

Columbia will continue to provide medical benefits for furloughed employees and dependents. The company will also invite furloughed employees to participate in Lean Manufacturing training sessions to prepare for their return to work, and will maintain contact with them regarding their status and anticipated Return to Work dates. The company also plans to provide a return-to-work cash incentive.

On a somewhat brighter note, in looking at the Columbia site today, I came across what might be the coolest web photo gallery out there. If you're a pilot, do yourself a favor by clicking here and checking it out yourself.

As an Oregonian, I am very proud to have the home of one of the slickest single-engine models just a couple of hours drive from my house, though the drop-dead gorgeous Santiam Pass, which cuts through the heart of the beautiful Cascade Range. As I have told myself many times, maybe this summer is the one where I'll actually get over to the Columbia plant for a VIP media tour, if such a thing exists.

Eclipses lined up and waiting.

Recently I read a very good article on a site called CharterX that quoted Michael Press, president and CEO of Single Pilot Jet Management as saying some quite shocking things about Eclipse Aviation and their current push to get their E500 delivered.

Press was quoted as saying that that on March 14th, Eclipse Aviation quietly delivered its second Eclipse 500 very light jet. “I know the owner that took delivery of Eclipse's second jet; he doesn't want his name in the media," Press said. In the article, Press also claimed he "personally saw 10 jets just sitting there [at the Eclipse plant]” completed and ready for delivery, waiting for FAA inspection and signoff.

I spoke with Press this week and confirmed that the quotes were indeed his. He also publishes a newsletter that makes for very interesting reading if you are closely following the Eclipse story. And if you want to drop a sack of cash on an E500 position, he is also a broker for the airframe and has numerous positions available for sale here.

To read the entire CharterX piece, click here. And, like me, you might be thinking “Just what IS CharterX anyway?” Well, here is the capsule 411 on this very extensive site:

The CharterX Industry XChange is the world's largest online marketplace for air charter buyers and sellers. The Industry XChange is used by charter operators, brokers, fractional & card programs, travel agents, flight departments and other volume charter buyers to make supply and demand connections.

Charter buyers use the Industry XChange's advanced aircraft, empty leg, Google mapping and operator search features to efficiently navigate through CharterX's database of air charter supply information. The Industry XChange gives buyers access to detailed information on over 15,000 charter aircraft, over 3,500 charter operators and over 1,500 empty legs.

CharterX's Industry Headline News is a must-read, covering the charter markets as well as the business jet sector. I have bookmarked their RSS feed and will be checking in frequently to see what is what in the wild and unpredictable world of personal jets and the people who fly, buy and own them.

A Very Good Sign.

I have been scouring the Internets for good news that leads me to believe that we might prevail in our fight to slam the door on Bushie's completely insane plan to effectively behead GA. But I really needed to look no further than my own representative in the House, Congressman Peter DeFazio.

Rep. DeFazio sits on the all-important House Aviation subcommittee, which reports to the the all-important U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (CTI)...the body who will have to rubber stamp W's crazy user fee and tax increase scheme.

Before the CTI can give Bush the green light to stab us in the back, DeFazio and the House Aviation subcommittee first have to begin the process with their seal of approval. But I recently received this ray of sunshine from Rep. DeFazio's office in D.C.:

"If the administration's goal is to reduce congestion by forcing GA from the air, its proposal to increase the fuel tax on general aviation by 366% just might do the trick,” said Congressman DeFazio. “I believe the House Aviation subcommittee will reject the administration's proposal."

Whoa! That sure doesn't sound like Bush should pop the champagne cork just yet...maybe this thing isn't the slam dunk that the GOP says it is. It appears from the Congressman's quote that the Aviation subcommittee “gets it” about this proposal being very dangerous to GA, business aviation and the economy of the entire country.

Of course, this week, Bush is basically giving Capitol Hill the finger on the U.S. attorney purge, because in his world, he is The Decider, and he'll decide when his buddies speak, even if subpoenas start flying up Pennsylvania Avenue. So if DeFazio's subcommittee says no on user fees, and the CIT says no as well, does no really mean no anymore in today's Washington D.C.?

Again I say...we here at WoF hope (pray) that W's eye is off the user fee/tax increase ball just long enough to allow us to kill this beast of a proposal. And when that happens, it looks like we'll have to tip the hat to Rep. DeFazio for living in our reality-based world, not in a world that revolves only around politics, cronies and favors.

A Multi-engine odyssey.

I read almost all of the aviation trade papers and magazines as part of my job, and some are far better then others. I skim a few of the comps that drop on my desk, but one publication that I read cover to cover each issue is General Aviation News.

It's not because they are based here in the Pacific Northwest, but because I can identify with their writers, who share a writing style very close to mine. And one of those writers – CFI/CFII Meg Godlewski – recently earned her multi-engine rating, following a path to that ticket that is (a) very notable, (b) completely memorable, and most of all, (c) it is an “odyssey” we have all lived ourselves.

First, let me say that I do not know Meg, unless you call reading her in GAN “knowing” someone. But in my world, we pilots are all family, and it gives me great joy to know a family member has kicked it up to the next level.

Here are some paraphrased snippets from a piece Meg sent me that outlines the challenges she fought through and the triumphs she enjoyed on her way to owning the privilege of flying with one engine hanging on each wing:

"The best things about getting the ME rating was that as a CFI/CFII, I spend a lot of time in the small airplanes letting someone else fly. It was nice to be in the left seat again and I like flying the twin because it requires me to have my “A-game” all the time because things happen so quickly."

"The worst things about getting the ME rating was getting all the ducks in a row. I had to save the money, and some unexpected big-ticket expenditures (like replacing the engine in my car) ate up the funds at least twice. I then broke my arm and there was definite loss of strength. I tried to fly a simulator with the cast on and it hurt so bad I decided never to do that again. When I got the cast off I hit the gym really hard to build up my strength and muscle endurance. I did exercises at the gym that mimicked the control movements I had to do in the airplane. There was a lot of leg press (rudder) and one-armed dumb-bell rows (yoke) in my workouts. The strength training paid off and after a few weeks of that I had no trouble in the airplane whatsoever."

"I plan to become a multiengine instructor with the rating. So many people get the MEI ticket as a means of building their hours to get to an airline job. I became a flight instructor because I enjoy flying and teaching people to fly. I imagine I will enjoy it twice as much when I do that in a multiengine aircraft."

Wow.

I have always wanted to step it up a notch myself, and a ME rating would be Oh So Cool. So major hat tip to this new twin pilot, who with her perseverance has taught us that nothing comes easy in our aviation world. And if you want to achieve great things, it requires your “A” game...something this writer/CFI/pilot apparently knows how to deliver.

You'll want to stroll over to GAN and read the whole story here. And while you're there, do yourself a favor and subscribe...you have my word, they will not disappoint.

Oh my God, it's so (gasp) BIG!

The mainstream media is having an orgasm today over the size of the A380, now that it has actually dropped into LAX and JFK in a well-coordinated show. I could list quotes all day from various big-league media outlets who note pertinent facts such as these:

It may trail the historic impact of Charles Lindbergh's 1927 solo flight across the Atlantic, but the Spirit of St. Louis also did not have a wingspan wider than a football field or space for more than 500 passengers.

The latest jetliner to claim the title of world's biggest passenger aircraft completed its inaugural flight to the United States on Monday, flying on football field-length wings and a prayer that airlines will want to shell out $300 million to buy the behemoth double-decker jet.

So the A380 is here, it's big and it costs a lot of money. What the media is not really talking much about is the inherent overweight problems of this giant aircraft. According to published quotes from Emirates President Tim Clark, his airline – one of the first to place orders for the A380 – is now realizing that the operating costs of its A380 fleet will be higher than originally planned. "There are still an extra six tons of weight we can't get out of the A380. That will cost us extra money in operation for the next 10 or 15 years," Clark said. That's six tons BEFORE you add the weight of the fuel. So when you put enough fuel in to carry all that extra blubber, you certainly can't expect to see these kinds of numbers:

The jet can seat 555 passengers in a typical three-class configuration or up to 853 in a one-class economy setup. It can hold 81,890 gallons of fuel, cruise at 560 mph and fly some 8,000 nautical miles, using 1 gallon of fuel per passenger per mile.

So, let's see, 8,000 NM, 555 souls, one gallon per pax/mile. That's 649,122 pounds of Jet A for the trip. But with only 560,127 pounds on board, they'll either have to leave the fat people in the terminal, lose 50 percent of your luggage, or cut that published 8,000 mile range down significantly. And don't even think about factoring in that extra 12,000 pounds, or they'll have to leave the four pallets of stale pretzels behind too.

O.K., admittedly I went off message there a bit, but that kind of stuff just baffles me. What doesn't baffle me is why Airbus is bringing their Dog and Pony Show across the pond:

Despite the plane's impressive statistics, Airbus has yet to sell any of the planes to U.S. carriers.

So when they do pick up a few orders from U.S. carriers, there are still only a handful of fields the A380 will be welcome. Those improved airports – according to FAA – are ANC (Anchorage), DEN, DFW, JFK, LAX. MCO (Orlando) and MIA.

Every time I read a word about the A380, I have to ask myself these questions: If I were the CFO of a large air carrier, would I buy the A380? Could I make the behemoth pencil out to a profit? Could I get it to enough destinations to generate enough revenue to offset the $300 million purchase price and immense fuel bill?

No, no and, um, no.

I really need to lighten up.

As regular readers of WoF know, the past few days, I've been ranting about the damned user fee proposal, so now I need to take a step back from the abyss, inhale deeply, and chill for a while.

So to the Internets I went to find that chill, and discovered that the amount of aviation humor out there is endless. Here are a few nuggets I found:

From skygod.com:

The three worst things to hear in the cockpit is when...
The second officer says, "Oh shit!"
The first officer says, "I have an idea!"
The captain say, "Hey, watch this!”

From ahajokes.com's aviation section:

After a real crusher of a landing in Phoenix, the Flight Attendant came on with, "Ladies and Gentlemen, please remain in your seats until Captain Crash and the Crew have brought the aircraft to a screeching halt up against the gate. And, once the tire smoke has cleared and the warning bells are silenced, we'll open the door and you can pick your way through the wreckage to the terminal.

There is plenty of aviation humor to be found on Thirty Thousand Feet, a damn decent web directory, including this classic from Tetsuji's Aviation Jokes.

Conversation between a pilot and an AME:
Doctor: Turn right and cough.
Pilot: (cough)
Doctor: Thank you. When was your last sexual experience?
Pilot: Well...ah..about 1957.
Doctor: Kinda been a while ago, hasn't it?
Pilot: Yes...but..I had to leave at 2005 to come over here.

I had to read that last one a couple of times before it hit me. O.K., now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Buttering us up.

Average Joe and Jane couldn't possibly care less that FAA and the Bushies want to impose fatal user fees and a 366 percent increase in fuel taxes on general and business aviation. All they really want is for their flight to depart and arrive on time. So one sure way to get the public to back the White House plan to stab us in the back is to scream LOUDLY that if FAA does not get more money FAST, expect more delays at our nation's airports.

In this FAA press release from March 15th, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters cautioned that aviation delays will grow without significant reforms, as forecasters predict air traffic will increase by the equivalent of two major hub airports each year through 2020:

The number of passengers carried by U.S. commercial air carriers is on track to hit the one billion mark by 2015, according to government forecasters. Certain key hubs, such as Washington Dulles (68 percent), New York Kennedy (59 percent), Los Angeles International (54 percent), and Atlanta Hartsfield (38 percent), will see significant growth in the number of take-offs and landings, risking major passenger delays if we fail to upgrade the nation’s air traffic control system. Secretary Peters noted that while the strong economy could drive new traffic, she also cautioned that already growing delays will continue to get worse without significant changes to the nation’s air traffic control system. Delays last year reached an all time high and now cost the nation’s economy over $10 billion annually.

And without question, the FAA release clearly points out who is behind this user fee agenda:

To meet the coming demand and avoid a continuation of this year’s record delays, the Bush Administration has proposed legislation to help relieve congestion, improve passenger airline travel, and cut noise for communities near airports. The Secretary noted that the legislation, the Next Generation Air Transportation System Financing Reform Act of 2007, would replace the decades-old system of collecting ticket taxes with a cost-based, stable and reliable funding program that relies on a combination of user fees, taxes and a federal government contribution to achieve the NextGen system.

What the FAA, King W, Secretary Peters, or anyone at the ATA fails to ever mention is that as proposed, the NGTS Financing Reform Act of 2007 will drive a stake through the heart of the aviation industry, killing off many flight schools, shuttering FBOs across the land, and closing down fledgling airframe makers who are now just getting their footing in the LSA arena.

Another point that is never made is this: Bush's cronies at the airlines must think that by effectively pricing VLJs and other private jets out of the market, all those jet buyers will now park their $3 million investment and herd themselves onto a delayed airliner to be crammed into an overbooked flight with the unwashed back in coach. We all know that the airline and ATA estimates of how the sky will darken with the shadows of a flood of VLJs is completely overblown, but it DOES make great headline fodder.

And worst of all, Bush's FAA re-financing fiasco will kill the dreams of a whole country full of nine-year-olds who now dream to one day...fly. When it costs them $225 an hour wet to fly IFR approaches in a rented G1000 Cessna 172SP, only the very rich will be able to afford flight training. The rest – the vast majority of our population's young people – will have to hang on the airport fence, wishing that back in the day, back in 2007, the worst president in history hadn't killed off GA.

Making the Right Noise in WDC.

I'm not yet ready to say we have slain the Bushies and their plan to jump into bed with their corporate buddies at ATA and the airlines, but AOPA is reporting that quite a few members of Congress are making comments in our favor. The grapevine seems to suggest W and the FAA may not have such an easy road to travel before they jam user fees and a 366 percent fuel tax increase down the throats of general and business aviation users.

As promised, here is the latest from AOPA, verbatim off their site:

The Bush administration's 70.1 cents-per-gallon tax on avgas is not likely to fly out of the House aviation subcommittee. Nor, for that matter, are the proposed user fees if the March 14 hearing is any indicator.

"I have grave reservations about implementing a user fee for which there does not appear to be a hard ceiling, and for which the FAA would have broad authority to raise fees to match whatever costs are incurred," subcommittee Chairman Jerry Costello (D-Ill.) told FAA Administrator Marion Blakey.

"I'm still unconvinced that the current system of aviation excise taxes that has given us a stable and ample trust fund needs to be changed so drastically," said Rep. John T. Salazar (D-Colo.), "and I'm very concerned about the impact on general aviation."

Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.) apologized for calling the proposal "DOA," at the last hearing, "but there was considerable frustration and anger among the members (of the subcommittee) about the huge increase in the gas tax."

And Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa) told the administrator, "I believe that general aviation is at the table and willing to pay our part through current resources, so let's see if we can find a solution. We've got to talk."

"I certainly agree," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "It's time to take the ridiculous tax increase and user fees off the table so that we can have a meaningful dialogue on FAA funding."

But, Boyer added, "We still have our work cut out for us."

While many of the subcommittee members are ready to look at other FAA funding ideas, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), the ranking member of the full committee and former chairman of the aviation subcommittee, is siding with the administration. "I'd like to see the whole system paid for by the users, not by taxpayers who don't use the system," said Mica. "I guess I'm the lone stranger in supporting the administration's plan."

Boyer is scheduled to testify at the next House transportation and infrastructure aviation subcommittee hearing, which will focus specifically on the tax and user fee proposals within the administration's proposed FAA reauthorization bill.

With the Scandal du Jour that comes out of the White House these days, I am praying that W's eye is off the user fee ball just long enough to let us whip this thing once and for all. Because in The Decider's world right now, what should really be more important then sticking a knife in aviation's back is avoiding subpoena city and saving the bacon of Rove, Cheney and Gonzo.

The Perfect Airplane
...for Me?

Regular readers of WoF know that we used to have a cherry 1963 Cessna 172D when we lived down in California, but sold our half when we moved to Eugene, Oregon. I now rent an almost identical '63 172D model, but as my aviation ad agency continues to grow, we are picking up more clients throughout the West, and another company plane is starting to make great business sense.

My partner Julie just spent a couple of days on the phone with United customer service over in what sounded like Bangladesh trying to change a ticket so we could schedule a photo shoot with a new client in Wyoming. But due to (a) language problems, and (b) the usual airline weirdness, “Dolly” as she called herself, failed to make the trip happen, and “Bob” wasn't much better. He could understand our request, and in quite broken English, slammed us with about an $800 quote for changing the round trip to a multi-city flight.

Screw that, I need my own airplane again!

So I have been really devoting quality time to sorting out the question of what model would serve our business and personal needs the best. Here are the specifications I know are etched in stone:

It needs to be fixed gear to save on insurance and annuals, and needs to cruise north of 140 knots and have the range to get throughout the 13 Western states on one fuel stop. It has to have enough useful load to carry 2-3 adults and their stuff, or the two of us and maybe a grandkid and all of his/her stuff(ed animals). It has to be IFR certified, and have a operating autopilot, preferably two axis. I'd like low airframe hours, but will settle for a mid-time airframe with a low-time engine. It has to have two radios, with at least one being flip-flop, and I'd LOVE a panel mounted GPS. All that, and it has to cost south of $100K.

In determining the solution to this riddle, I realized that of all the planes that fit the above criteria, the one plane that does it all doe me is the 1979 or 1980 Cessna 182Q Skylane. At 75% cruise, the 230 HP engine will pull me along at 144 kts, but dirty, it stalls at a safe and sane 50 kts. It's 1,010 ft/min rate of climb will do nicely up to the 16,500 ft service ceiling, which is plenty high to get over any of the West's ranges. I LOVE the 92 gallons of fuel that will give me 880 NM range, and the 654 lbs. of load after the tanks are topped will haul the two of us and 299 lbs. of our crap a long, long ways.

What draws me to the 182Q is that when all is said and done, it is still a nice, friendly Cessna. I've flown the 150, the 152 Aerobat, several 172s, and a 172XP, and without exception, they all fly exactly the same. The 182Q ought to fly just like the rest, and it'll get off the ground in 705 feet and land in just 590 feet...so it'll perform in high/hot or small strip situations easily.

Docile, predictable and dependable...three words to describe the Cessna 182Q Skylane. Now all I have to do is line my ducks up in precisely the right order, wait for my ship to come in, and pray the stars will align properly. If none of that works, I'll just ask the Universe to make it happen. If you don't know what that means, click here and ask for Michael.

Now Airbus Has
to Deal With a Strike.

The news of a planned restructuring at Airbus that will axe as many as 10,000 workers seems to have really peeved quite a few union employees, who have now announced they will stage a strike in France, Germany and Spain this coming Friday.

This latest blow to Airbus – piled on top of all their other problems – cannot possibly have a good outcome for anyone. After spending a dozen years as a card-carrying Teamster driving big trucks way WAY back in the the day to make ends meet, I do not have a very good opinion of most unions anymore, however:

Now don't get me wrong, there can be a place for unions, when they are realistic in their demands. Turn the screws up too high by bargaining for unrealistic pay and benefits, and soon that struggling company will be shopping those union jobs offshore. And once the company is struggling to survive financially, kicking it in the teeth with a work stoppage will NEVER help the situation.

So when I hear that Airbus' workers are going off to the sidewalk to stomp their feet and carry their signs, they accept part of the blame – along with the Airbus management – if the company cannot survive this hit. Maybe I'm missing something here, but if the company problems stem from not building the A380 fast enough to keep buyers in the sales book, how can slowing down that process help those workers keep their jobs?

Strikes make no sense to me...never have. Nobody wins, everyone loses, and the one thing that is guaranteed to come out of a walkout is that if the workforce's relationship with management sucked before the strike, you can bet that everyone in the building will hate each other even more after the damn thing is settled. Companies with these kinds of woes have serious morale issues, and those disgruntled workers will only get more pissed off each minute they walk the picket line. And, if they do ever return to work, are these the people you want assembling your airplane?

Sorry, but I'm buying my airliners from the company that has happy employees who aren't fighting with their boss.

A Good Day
For Boeing,
A Bad Week
for Airbus.

Night and Day. That's the current difference between rivals Boeing and Airbus, who for years have been on the world's stage, duking it out toe-to-toe in a cage match to the finish. If this were a reality TV show, we'd be forced to call it Last Airliner Manufacturer Standing.

Here is how good it's going for Boeing, and how ugly the world is becoming for Airbus:

This continues to be a very good first quarter for Boeing, who on Monday announced $4.5 billion in sales from buyers in Kuwait, Russia, and the United States. These orders bolster their order book with a weak dollar making their planes a bargain for the rest of the world. But troubled Airbus suffered a serious blow this week when United Parcel Service Inc. cancelled their order for 10 Airbus A380 freighters, worth approximately $3 billion at list prices, joining its rival FedEx which cancelled an identical order last year. This news piles on the woes for Airbus, who last week announced a major restructuring plan that will lead to about 10,000 job losses among Airbus staff and subcontractors in France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Spain.

Ouch.

So as Europe reels because the A380 anchor is dragging down the Airbus ship, Boeing can't write orders fast enough. From Aero News Network:

In addition to an 18-plane deal from Kuwait's Aviation Lease and Finance Company, on Monday Continental Airlines ordered five 787s, worth about $900 million, increasing its orders for the new plane to 25. It also upgraded 12 existing orders for the 787-8 to -9's, a larger variant with 40 additional seats. It's the first order for the larger Dreamliner variant from a US carrier. And the Russian air freight company Volga-Dnepr also reportedly signed a deal worth $1.4 billion dollars for five new 747-8 Freighters, with an option for five more. The company's president told Reuters it is the biggest deal in Russian civil aviation history.

Things are really heating up in the Dreamliner project, with new orders prompting rumors reported last week that Boeing is discussing increased 787 production with suppliers. But the really wild news is the ANN report that American Airlines has hinted it may want as many as 300 new 737's, coming conveniently at a time when about 7,000 Boeing workers may become idle due to the planned shutdown of the C-17 production line.

Just about everyone in the industry has predicted that 2007 will be a year to remember in aviation. The beginning of a mega-shift in airliner manufacturing superiority is just one of the huge stories this year, with the user fee fight and the delivery of VLJs (or the non-delivery of some VLJs) also requiring us to keep on top of many very big stories all at one time.

And as a writer, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Most Dangerous
Airports...Exposed!

I recently found this headline today on the Internets:


Now there's two words to get any air travelers attention...DEATH and INJURY. You'd think that by the screaming head (in red 'ink') that this flying stuff is as deadly as wrestling a dozen live tigers who are really hungry. And we now know the names of some of “America's Most Dangerous Airports”...but with an aviator's analysis, I found questions in this story creating holes big enough to fly an A380 through without bending the wingtips.

Here's a taste of some of that good ol' MSM aviation reporting:

“Most fliers worry about crashing in-flight even though only 74 commercial aircraft have crashed since 2001, despite more than 10 million flights annually.” So let's see, that's 10 million flights a year times five years (2002-2006), or FIFTY MILLION FLIGHTS with only 74 crashes. My calculator tells me that's 0.00000148 percent! That doesn't really sound like so much death and destruction.

One of the fields that made this list is Long Beach/Dougherty Field, the scene of 78 incidents and no fatalities. So no DEATH to report but LGB is still being called dangerous? How can they sell papers with such a pathetic mortality rate?

Newark International Airport came in at No. 7 in this story, apparently because of an August, 2005 incident where an arriving Continental Boeing 737 pulling into its assigned gate “sliced two parked Embraer jets.” A “fender bender”, yes...sounds pretty unsafe for the jets, but how does this qualify EWR as one of the most dangerous airports in the country?

O.K., in all fairness, the article does explain that the FAA is aware of the growing number of runway incursions, and that the money is nowhere to be found to do much about it. I just get peeved each time I read one of these MSM articles that simple spews numbers just to take up column inches.

Gotta go now and book my next business trip. I've decided to fly commercial and challenge the Gods as I try to beat those odds of 0.00000148 percent and survive another ride in a pressurized tube being hurled violently through the air by two flaming engines that create massive amounts of thrust by igniting several thousand pounds of explosive highly-compressed jet fuel into a raging eruption that blasts myself down to California at close to 500 miles per hour.

Sounds pretty dangerous, if you just line the words up in the right order. Hmm, maybe I ought to get a job with the mainstream media...

An Exception to my Rule.

Anyone that reads WoF with great regularity knows my political leanings and my distain for anyone in Washington with an “R” after their name. But there is now one HUGE reason for me to exclude Oklahoma Senator James M. Inhofe from that group.

AOPA is reporting on Inhofe's appearance on behalf of GA and AOPA before the Senate Commerce aviation subcommittee. Speaking with conviction as any pilot would if given the chance, Inhofe called the proposed nearly fourfold increase in general aviation fuel taxes "completely unacceptable."

Up front, I want to tell you I know very little about anything else Inhofe as done, and to be sure, I'll bet our opinions on most everything are miles apart across the aisle. But I have to give the Senator a glorious standing ovation for the way he sent his message to Congress:

The fact that Sen. Inhofe, a passionate GA pilot and AOPA member, would stick up for general aviation is not surprising. What is surprising is where he did it. Sen. Inhofe is not a member of the Commerce Committee, and in the gentlemanly world of the Senate, one treads lightly on another's turf. For Inhofe to go uninvited into the committee hearing room and plead for GA meant that he felt so strongly about the issue that he was willing to do what it took to make his point.

Senator Inhofe is working closely with AOPA President Phil Boyer and his staff to keep the pressure from the GA community on the Deciders up on The Hill. In a meeting with the Senator before his subcommittee appearance, Boyer told Inhofe "One of the key points to be made at the hearing is how important it is to take user fees off the table. That way we can have a meaningful debate about the future of FAA funding." As usual, Boyer is right on.

Inhofe is an active commercial, instrument-rated pilot with more than 50 years flying experience, and as a businessman, continues to fly himself regularly to meet his constituents and serve his state. At the hearing, he said:

“GA contributes more than $100 billion annually to the economy, and is one of the few U.S.-based industries making a positive contribution to the country's balance of trade. Why we would consider destroying that is beyond my understanding. But make no mistake, if this proposal is adopted, there will be a dramatic and immediate negative effect on general aviation."

Perfectly chosen words, Senator. I am getting tidbits of information here and there from aopa.org and other sources that tell me the tide is turning slightly in our favor on this issue. AOPA reports that GA has flooded Congress with tons of letters opposing the proposed changes to FAA funding, and it appears from this article that those letters may be having an favorable impact.

We need to keep this fight up. I am personally going to shoot Senator Inhofe a thank you letter right now, and propose you do the same here.

To the San Juans...by FSX

No secret here that I am a Mac user, and because of that, I've never even fired up Microsoft Flight Simulator. I just got a whizbang new Macbook Pro with Windows XP installed next to OSX, and it can do everything but wash my dog, but because of some sort of graphics card glitchery, the MSFX demo just won't light off.

So I did not know that inside of MSFX, you actually fly specified missions, one being a trip to the San Juans via Kenmore Air's Beaver seaplanes! I stumbled onto this when reading Owen Hewitt's Polypoke blog, a nice read devoted to aviation and sim flying.

Owen has posted a review of the San Juans Island Run in MSFX, and it really makes me jealous to see how the dark side flies. And it just makes sense that Microsoft would have a Kenmore seaplane “mission” in FSX, since their main office is right there in the Seattle area.

This is just one piece of this evolving Kenmore Air story that is just so very cool. My email has been ringing off the hook – if that is even possible – and so far two other blogs (San Juan Update and Polypoke) have posted links over to WoF, driving a ton of traffic my way. I've also heard from at least one person who plans on being in Seattle this weekend and is going to try to book a scenic flight on Kenmore Air.

That is one smart dude.

If you are still looking for the ridealong story, here is part one, here is part two, and here is the photo gallery. And if you want to get started flying Microsoft Flight Simulator missions, read all about it here.

Around the
San Juans
and Inbound
to Seattle
(part two of two)

If you're looking for part one of this post, find it here.

Visit the photo gallery for this trip here.

In part one of this post, I told you how my pre-conceived notions about seaplanes were blown apart on my first leg of this wonderful ridealong with Kenmore Air in one of their turbine Otters. I found out that seaplanes with really large jet engines hanging on the nose get up on the step big time in about the length of three really fine Halibut laid end to end. I also found out that unlike some of the tiny fishing boats I've owned that rattled your teeth at any speed over five knots, landing a big multi-passenger seaplane – if in the right hands – can be smooth enough to leave the champagne glass atop the instrument panel still full of bubbly as the floats kiss the water.

I was rewarded by the WX Gods with near-perfect flying weather to see the sights on this trip. As we bopped between the islands of the San Juans, I tried to imagine the same flight with 25 knot crosswinds, rain trying hard to become snow, and temperatures toying with the freezing mark. On the first leg, Kenmore pilot Chuck Perry delivered me and one paying fare into Friday Harbor like a pro...but this multi-stop jaunt was only just beginning.

Leg 2: Friday Harbor to Deer Harbor, Orcas Island

After boarding three fares and their luggage, our pilot went through the obligatory safety briefing with about the same excitement that you get from the flight attendants on the big airlines. Doors, seat belts, escape hatch, earplugs, yada, yada, yada. From the looks on the passengers' faces, all they really wanted to hear was the sound of a PT6 spooling up for departure. But rules ARE rules, and Chuck made damn sure everyone aboard knew where the holes were in the fuselage in case we had to bail out fast. Oh, and don't be the idiot that pulls the red handle on your life vest inside the plane or the people stuck behind you will have to slap you silly.

As we were loading souls and Samsonites into Otter Eight Seven Kilo Alpha, the Friday Harbor to Seattle ferry boat slid by outbound. We will pass up this particular ferry boat an hour later as we return to Seattle in the Otter, proving that the De Havilland is a much more efficient island hopping machine then a boat loaded with cars and people.

The short flight over to Deer Harbor was a non-event, with Chuck gaining only enough altitude to keep from scaring the people in back. Landing in this scenic port was also without surprise, until we tried to taxi into the dock where two more fares were waiting. Since the Otter makes a nice wide swing to the right towards the dock, it helps the pilot to have a healthy amount of clear water to swing that spinning prop around in:

But as we s-l-o-w-l-y taxied in, a sailboat was attempting to sail somewhere, directly at our twelve o'clock. The trouble was that Chuck wasn't sure where they were going to aim their bow. Would they sail right into our path, or drift left? As the Otter crept closer, Chuck was verbally making up “plan B”, which was to swing wide right of them, then hook it back left and then hard right to begin the docking dance. And that's the way it came down, too, a non-event that was handled very well by a guy who had obviously done this a few times before.

Interesting note: As we approached the sailboat, I asked who had the right of way, the plane or the boat. I expected there were some sort of complex set of maritime regulations, but Chuck simply said “no difference, if my floats are in the water...I'm a boat.” So much for pre-conceived notion #5.

Leg 3: Deer Harbor to Westsound, Orcas Island

With a couple more fares strapped down in back, we gently taxi out of Deer Harbor on water as smooth as glass. As the dock slips farther away, Chuck brings up the power, drops the yoke into his lap to get the Otter up on the step, and in moments, the fish get smaller as we begin a shallow climb out. The reason we are not nose high and climbing like a homesick angel is that our next stop – Westsound – is just one tiny island away.

The short hop over to Westsound takes you over some of the most scenic islands imaginable. The sun was now beginning to hide behind the Olympics to the West, and reflections gleam off the calm waters below. We arrive without so much as a splash dead in the center of West Sound, and taxi in to pick up enough people to fill the Otter's seats. Again, Chuck drives the nose towards the dock, rips hard right, jumps out, and manages to catch the wing rope as it meanders by. I am now convinced that it could get pretty messy when a rookie tries to learn the intricate seaplane docking maneuver because to my untrained eye, there sure seems like there is lots to go wrong here. Maybe that is why the dock is lined with tires, hmmm?

Leg 4: Westsound, Orcas Island to Lake Union, Seattle

Now with all the seats full and the aft baggage hold full, Chuck and the Otter must work a bit harder to get on the step and in the air. With full power, our pilot yanks back on the yoke, but must hold it there maybe four seconds in order for the Otter to get up on the floats. Once the step is assured, Chuck moves the yoke forward, but wrestles with the Otter a bit coaxing both floats to leave the water simultaneously. He throws in full and HARD left aileron to correct whatever he was feeling wasn't right with the floats. I am amazed at how keen this pilot's seat-of-pants flying must be, and can only imagine the rodeo this max gross weight takeoff might be in choppy water and vicious winds.

We lumber off westbound, into a sunset that is truly a photographer's dream. As the last beams of a late winter sun bounce off the many inlets, sounds and bays at our twelve o'clock, I am making my Canon 10D digital SLR glow, snapping images so fast the flash card cries for mercy. In all, I will end up shooting almost 400 images on this 2.75 hour ridealong.

With the winds at 2,000' msl out of the east at maybe 25 knots, Chuck chooses to make the return trip to Lake Union at 500' instead. He tells me that Kenmore's pilots put safety first, and often times will not fly when the winds are too strong or to variable. I also get the feeling that it wasn't the case way up in Ketchikan where Chuck learned to fly floats. Up in Alaska, I am told with grin, they'll fly through just about anything.

We soon overtake the Friday Harbor ferry, plowing through the water towards Seattle. I am glad to be riding in the De Havilland this day, because the alternative, down there plodding along, seems far too slow. All along the route, the sunset just keeps getting more dramatic, and I keep stuffing more pixels into the 10D's memory. The Otter proves to be a smooth and stable photo platform, and the Gods were cooperating with a majestic show as the sun melted into the Olympics.

As we approach the Seattle metro area, Chuck points out “company traffic”, a Beaver outbound passing right to left, high. Too cool. I get the impression the sky is thick with Kenmore Air seaplanes up in these parts. We sneak up on Seattle, and I pick out Lake Union, which looks small from 20 NM out and appears to be sandwiched right in the middle of town. Chuck pulls power and follows the I-5 freeway down to final, landing a little south of east. As we descend, I remember thinking the lake is really NOT getting any bigger.

At this point, I am shooting pictures a million a minute. Chuck scans the water for boats, and picks out a nice fat corridor between any floating traffic to set down the Otter. Without a splash, we arrive, the sun's last remaining rays teasing us as they reflect off the high-rises of downtown and the Space Needle. As we taxi to the “gate”, we pass another outbound Kenmore Beaver, off to somewhere, making me think that DAMN, these guys are BUSY!

With my ridealong concluded, I thank Chuck for a job well done, and thank Brandon for hooking me up. It was a scenic ride I will never, ever forget, and one I recommend highly to anyone who ever gets into Seattle. If you love airplanes, you MUST book a scenic flight with Kenmore Air, you will not regret it. Or, if you want to leave a great amount of troubles behind and sneak off to the San Juans for a little R & R, flying there by seaplane with Kenmore is the way to go.

Visit the photo gallery for this trip here. Book that flight with Kenmore here.

Seattle and the
San Juans From
the Right Seat of
a Turbine Otter
(Part one of two)

View the photo gallery from this trip here

Each time I travel on business or pleasure, I seem to always try and find something to do for fun that involves airplanes. A trip March 3-5 to Seattle on business would have been the perfect time to tour Boeing's factory, but with just two days in town to play before an agency presentation on Monday, it looked like airplanes would be replaced by flying fish at Pike Place Public Market, shopping, eating and enjoying the Seattle area for the first time since my teens.

But all that changed instantly on Saturday afternoon. As I stood on the Marriott Residence Inn's balcony overlooking scenic Lake Union, a unmistakable sound began reverberating across the marinas below, past the zillion-dollar motoryachts before bouncing off the high-rise condos encircling the lake and arriving at my smiling face. What made me grin widely was the wonderful sound of a large radial engine pulling a beautiful yellow and white De Havilland Beaver seaplane off the lake. To me, it was like going to the symphony.

As I watched the Beaver lumber off across the lake, it dawned on me that I had never been in a seaplane. I remembered seeing a rack card down in the lobby offering seaplane sightseeing flights, and when Julie said I should make that my “recreation” for this trip, without hesitation, my Sunday plans were made. Or so I thought...

The seaplane airline – Kenmore Air – offers one of the finest views of Seattle, Victoria and the San Juans you can find. Their sightseeing flights fill up, so when I called, I told them I was a pilot and was eager to take my first seaplane ride and then post about the experience here. As if determined not to disappoint, Kenmore's Lake Union Supervisor, Brandon Freeman, found a way to accommodate me by slipping me into the right seat of their afternoon multi-stop run from their busy Lake Union Terminal to Friday Harbor on San Juan Island and then on to Deer Harbor and West Sound on Orcas Island. It was one of the most awesome trips I have made by air ever...a “media ridealong” I will never, ever forget.

Here is part one of the story. Please bookmark my blog and check back soon for the conclusion.

View the photo gallery from this trip here

Lake Union departure, outbound

First, a little background on Kenmore Air, from their website:

The airline was started in 1946 by Bob Munro, Reg Collins, and Jack Mines with one airplane flying from a single hangar at Seattle's Lake Washington. Today, Kenmore Air is among the best-known and most respected float plane operations in the world, flying an eclectic fleet made up of 25 piston Beavers, turbine Otters and Caravans, landing passengers on glaciers, lakes and harbors among the mist-shrouded fjords and islands of the U.S. and Canadian northwest.

I had my pre-concieved notions about flight in a seaplane, and all were proven incorrect. My pilot for the ridealong was Kenmore's Chuck Perry, a very capable seaplane stick who began flying floats 30 years ago in Ketchikan, Alaska. Pre-conceived notion #1 was obliterated when I assumed Perry would prefer to be called “Captain”...since a seaplane is really just a boat/plane hybrid. I thought that would be the respectful way to address the guy with the yoke in his hand, but he politely told me he just prefers Chuck. I determined quickly that “captains” drove tugboats, and Alaskans that fly off the water in planes equipped with floats are really just like the rest of us aviators.

Pre-conceived notion #2 came when Chuck lit up the 750-shp PT6 hanging on the Otter's nose. Blindfolded, Perry could have done this maneuver quickly, since it appeared he had done it about ten millions time before. Calmly, he brought up the power, pointed the nose to the middle of the lake where there were no sailboats, and sent the throttle to the forward stop. With just three souls and no luggage on board, Otter November Eight Seven Kilo Alpha was off the water in well under half the distance I expected, wiping out my expectation that seaplanes took forever to launch.

Seattle is the jewel of the Pacific Northwest, and is a very beautiful city from the air. The Lake Union departure takes you a little west of north out over Puget Sound, and everywhere you look, there is something really great to see. Level at 2,000, I watch Whidbey Island slip by under the right wing before we head out over the Straight of Juan de Fuca. We push on gracefully past tiny Smith Island, an ominous chunk of rock far out in the deep water that looks like it's been the worst nightmare of many mariners over the years. This is scenery like you cannot imagine, with small, tree-covered islands off on the horizon, encircling waterways split down the middle by the ocasssional wake of a container ship or ferry boat.

Soon, I see Chuck start pulling back power, and a look at the Garmin 430 tells me Friday Harbor – our first stop – is coming up on the left. Our winds are light and from about seven o'clock, so Chuck drives the Otter straight at the gut of Friday Harbor, trims for 80 knots, and floats in for what I thought to be a greaser arrival...is it even possible to grease landings on the ocean? But apparently Perry missed “one small wake” from a boat, and that tiny bump forced him to call it “the worst landing ever”. Go figure...it was about five times smoother than I had expected, ripping a huge hole in pre-conceived notion #3 that seaplanes landing on water would be rough as hell. I think I got lucky though, because Perry said this was the nicest WX and the best flying day he'd seen in months.

We slowly taxi towards the Kenmore dock, and I notice it is deserted. Where is the “ramp” crew...where are the guys who will tie the plane down? As we get within a few feet of the dock, I remember thinking that we were coming in way too hot, but since all my pre-conceived notions about seaplanes have been wrong so far, I sat back and watched what turned out to be quite a show as Chuck performed a docking maneuver only a seaplane pilot with the legs of a twentysomething could pull off.

Here is the drill for parking a turbine Otter at a dock by yourself: Keep up enough speed through the water to allow authority to the water rudders. Lose that, Chuck warns, and the gigantic tail of the Otter will catch even a tiny amount of wind and weathervane the plane possibly out of control. As you near the dock on the left side, kick in lots of right rudder while pulling the prop to reverse pitch. This puts the plane into sort of a powerslide towards the dock, but wait...the fun is only just beginning:

At this point, Chuck pops open the left pilot's door and vanishes down the side of the plane in a graceful move that if all goes well, will end with his feet planted firmly on the dock. At this point – for about two seconds – the Otter is free of any control, gliding along the dock, pilotless. I soon find out what those long ropes hanging from the wings are for...they're what Chuck grabs as the Otter's wing moves over his head. Like he has done so many times before, he reins the Otter in, firmly tugging it back to the dock. A blur of his experienced hands wraps a tiedown rope to the float...and we have arrived.

I have completed my first-ever flight as right seat observer in a turbine Otter, and it was awesome. I expected a slow departure, a rough-and-tumble ride, and a rodeo landing. What I got was an immediate blast off, a perfectly smooth cruise, and a “10” landing and dock arrival that looked easier than it probably was to pull off. All at the hands of a guy who makes driving a turbine Otter look like nothing like work, for an airline who seems – at least on this trip – to do everything right.

In part two of this post, I will tell you what it's like to fly over the gorgeous San Juans, and what life is like for a busy seaplane pilot as he slips in and out of dock after dock picking up fares. I'll conclude with the flat-out incredible experience coming back into Seattle's Lake Union at sunset, and let you know how you too can fly the San Juans with Kenmore Air.

Read PART TWO of this post here

View the photo gallery from this trip here

In AOPA's
Own Words.

Here is another installment of my promise to pass along anything big AOPA produces on the FAA Funding issue. This is straight from their site:

FAA funding: Airlines win and GA loses

When powerful business interests like the airlines lobby Congress and the FAA hard for a change in the law, you know they have something to gain.

And someone stands to lose. Recent FAA data make it clear; the losers are piston-engine aircraft owners, pilots, and business aviation.

"It's no wonder the airlines love this proposal so much," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Not only would they pay less, they'd have more control over who uses the air traffic control system, and they'd have the majority vote in setting the fees they charge themselves and others."

Under the Bush administration's FAA funding proposal, the "legacy airlines" (American, United, Delta, etc.) would see the amount they channel to the government drop by 27 percent. (Remember, under today's tax structure it is the passenger, not the airline, who actually pays that bill.) That would reduce their payment some $1.7 billion a year. The low-cost airlines, such as Southwest and JetBlue, would pay Uncle Sam about $286 million less per year — a 15-percent reduction.

But piston-engine fliers as a group would see their taxes increase $100 million — that's 344 percent more by the FAA's calculations.

It's nearly as bad for the kerosene burners. Turbine-powered GA aircraft would pay 333 percent more — an additional $868 million.

But at least airline passengers will benefit, right?

Don't count on it. Under the existing structure, airline passengers pay the ticket tax. The airline simply adds the tax amount to the charge and forwards the money to the U.S. Treasury.

Under the new FAA funding proposal, the airlines would be charged user fees, not taxes. They wouldn't be a separate item on the passenger's ticket as it is today. The airline would get a bill from Uncle Sam, and they would calculate that charge into the cost of a ticket.

"Do you really think the airlines are going to pass that cost savings on to the passenger?" asked Boyer.

We must
fight back.

One aspect of Washington's war on general aviation that not many of us are really thinking about is how proposed massive increases in user fees and fuel taxes will drive a dagger right through the heart of the U.S. flight training industry. AOPA is projecting the fuel tax increase to be as much as 366 percent, and of the thousands of people who have written Congress on behalf of the GA community, this pilot who wrote Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) hit the nail squarely on the head:

"Increased fuel taxes and cost related to air traffic control services would cause enough pilots to quit flying that it would start a downward economic cycle. Airplanes would be parked. Aviation service providers would lose customers and begin to fail. Jobs would be lost."

But the same pilot really struck gold when he added this great observation about what the Bush/FAA user fee scheme could do to flight schools:

“It [the proposed tax increase] would make it hard for the airlines to find new pilots. It costs an aspiring airline pilot $70,000 or more to train to reach the FAA-mandated minimum experience. The proposed fuel taxes and user fees would effectively double the cost of training to an estimated $150,000. It would be impossible for enough pilots to train for [airline jobs] if these fees are enacted."

Well said.

I had not yet performed proper dot connection on this aspect of the horrible user fee idea. The writer is correct with his assumption that the doubling of training fees will indeed shutter many schools. It is already wildly expensive to earn the proper ratings and certificates just to gain the privilege of being able to drag down really low wages as a first-year FO with one of the regionals who like to hire fresh young faces right out of school and pay them dirt wages because they know the newbies must build time.

So if we are not successful in fighting off this new attack from Capitol Hill, I really believe it could hit the flight schools hard. Let's say the “toxic mix” – as NBAA calls it – of user fees and increased taxes cause student starts to drop substantially...where does that leave the airlines? And yes, that is the same airlines – along with the ATA – that are lobbying hard for these crazy FAA funding “changes” in the first place. Where do they think those newbie FOs are going to come from? Certainly not the nation's flight academys...the same schools they helped to board up.

If the airlines cause a self-inflicted shortage of line pilots, who will fly their planes? Two choices are you...and me. Now I can't speak for you, but I've greased a few nice landings flying a CRJ-700 in X-Plane, so maybe when the carriers price all the new recruits out of the market, they can just resort to “do it yourself” commercial air travel. Hell, hand me the keys and fill it full of gas, people and suitcases. All I really need are the rotation, pattern and fence speeds and theoretically I should be able to aim it at a runway, firewall the FADEC and plow through the clouds on my way to what will most likely be a really dramatic landing.

Or, we can kill this user fee idea now and leave the flying to the pros.