Corporate Aviation

There are basically two type of aviation business for personal travel the first being corporate and the second being commercial. Each has it own advantages and disadvantages for the traveler and for the pilot employed by the company. Most people are familiar with the first one we will discuss; the commercial airline. Commercial airlines are an airline that has a specific route and schedule they fly. Anyone can buy a ticket and get to their destination. This causes a problem for some businesses because they rarely fly into the smaller regional airports. These smaller airports are typically in the vicinity of where the companies send their employees. Also a passenger may have to use a full day just to get to a city that may only be a 4 hour flight away due to the travel time to the airport, the waiting time for their flight, and maybe a layover added. This loss of time really affects the company since having a key employee out all day effects their productivity. Lastly most companies need to send their employees to a destination without very much lead time. This increases the cost of ticket and if business trips are canceled the company loses out on the cost of the ticket. In most cases both problems effect the bottom line of the company.

            Corporate aviation on the other hand is an as needed service. Your company owns the plane and has the pilots either on their payroll or they have hired a management company who supplies the pilots. This means the plane is ready to go when you are ready. There isn’t a worry about purchasing tickets last minute or trying to schedule a trip so that your employee is sitting around in an airport for the majority of the day without getting work done. This also means if you need to cancel flights then you don’t lose out on that money that was spent on a commercial airline ticket. The major advantage of the corporate flight department is that you can get your employees to the correct town 90% of the time. “Business aviation serves ten times the number of communities (more than 5,000 airports) served by commercial airlines (about 500 airports). This means business aviation can allow companies to locate plants or facilities in small towns or rural communities with little or no commercial airline service. With nearly 100 communities having lost airline service” (No Plane No gain, 2015). Therefore, they won’t have to fly into a major hub, then have to rent a car and drive for hours to their intended destination. “Business aviation allows for efficient, flexible, safe, secure and cost-effective access to destinations across the country and around the world. Because employees can meet, plan and work with each other aboard business aircraft, productivity enroute is greatly enhanced” (NBAA,2015). This means less travel time and more productivity for your employee. These differences are the basic argument for why a company can realize an increase in profitability by utilizing a corporate aviation department.

            As a pilot there are the same basics opportunities in both realms of aviation. Both corporate aviation and commercial aviation utilize pilots and copilots. Although there are a lot more opportunities out there in the commercial aviation field than there are in the in the corporate field. There is a drawback,  91 corporate aviation department can set their own minimums for their pilots with the basic requirement being either a single engine commercial license or a multi-engine commercial license. Their pilots are not required by the FAA to carry an ATP. This is a positive attribute since most pilots can acquire a job in the right seat of a corporate plane sooner than a regional airline. With that being said competition is high for the fewer slots that are available. There is also a higher starting salary within thecorporate aviation field than there is with regional airlines. This also is a benefit to the pilots although the trade of is a lower pay scale at the end of your career if you choose to stay in corporate aviation. Lastly the chances that you are home at night and not away from your family for long periods of time are also better for the corporate pilot.

Corporate Eagle is a great example of corporate aviation company. Although they are not the traditional aviation department they are what are gradually replacing company owned aviation departments. Corporate eagle is an aviation management company. Their role is to provide management, maintenance and pilot services for corporations that own their own aircraft. In this role they are saving those companies money by not having to have an aviation department on their payroll full time. The pilots at Corporate Eagle fly a number of different company’s jets. Their fleet consists of Company fleet consists of “13 aircraft (3 x King Air B200, 3 x Hawker 700, 4 x 800XP, and 3 x Falcon 2000) with operations based at KPTK”. (Warner, 2014) Although they primarily act as a management company corporate eagle does hold a part 135 operators certificate.  This means that they can run charter services. This also means companies can opt to have corporate eagle hire out their jets to offset the maintenance and storage costs, which further saves the owners money. The hiring requirements for pilots are a commercial multi certificate with a IFR rating, a CFI, CFII and MEI with 1500 hours is preferred. This is a starting point they have hired pilots with less hours.

 

Business Aircraft Uses. (2015, January 1). Retrieved February 28, 2015, from http://www.nbaa.org/business-aviation/uses/

Business Leaders on Business Aviation | No Plane No Gain. (2015, January 1). Retrieved February 28, 2015, from http://www.noplanenogain.org/Advocacy_Tools.htm?m=47&s=407#.VPIcMZV0yP8

Warner, S. (2014, September 15). Job Post: Corporate Eagle - First Officer/Second-In-Command. Retrieved February 28, 2015, from http://aviation.wmich.edu/jobs-scholarships-and-internship-postings/bid/355164/Job-Post-Corporate-Eagle-First-Officer-Second-In-Command

NTSB "Most Wanted" list for 2015

The issues identified by the NTSB have proven to become a significant problem in recent times for the aviation industry. According to the FAA “Loss of control – mainly stalls – accounts for the most GA fatal accidents”.(FAA,2014)  This threat is considered to be more self-imposed. The reason behind this threat deals with the lack of professionalism of a general aviation pilot.  Considering the weather in Michigan, the average private pilot mostly flies a few times a month; therefore during the winter months the general aviation pilot does not typically fly. Even when the private pilots do fly they are most likely not practicing maneuvers such as stalls and unusual attitudes. Practicing these maneuvers would help them avoid a potentially hazardous situation before they lose control. Then you have the pilots who lack professionalism under any circumstance. For example, there was a recent accident in Colorado where the pilot of a Cessna 150 lost control because he was taking a selfie.  According to an NTSB investigator “The evidence suggests that Singh got distracted, disoriented, stalled the plane and crashed” and goes on to say "During the climb-out portion of flight, the pilot uses his cellphone to take a self-photograph. The camera's flash was activated and illuminated the cockpit area," NTSB investigators reported about one of Singh's flights a few minutes before the crash (Hughes,2015).  "During the climb-out phase, the pilot was seen making keyboard entries to his cell phone and additional keyboard entries on a portion of flight consistent with the downwind leg" (Hughes,2015). A key suggestion brought forth by the NTSB is to manage distractions so that they will not interfere with the pilots situational awareness this would have defiantly prevented the Colorado accident.

The NTSB also cited the following accidents “on August 9, 2013, in East Haven, Connecticut, while attempting a circling approach in and out of clouds during gusty wind conditions, a Rockwell International 690B entered an inadvertent aerodynamic stall/spin and crashed into a house, resulting in the deaths of two children in the house. In another example, on December 12, 2013, near Collbran, Colorado, while maneuvering at low altitude looking for lost cattle, a Piper PA 24-250 entered an inadvertent aerodynamic stall/spin and impacted terrain, resulting in three fatalities onboard the airplane. And, on December 29, 2012, near Lakeside, California, while the non-instrument-rated pilot was climbing an experimental amateur-built Lancair IV-P through cloud layers, the airplane entered an inadvertent aerodynamic stall/spin and completed seven 360-degree revolutions before impacting the ground, resulting in three fatalities onboard the airplane”(NTSB, 2015). All of the above accidents seem like they could have been easily prevented by an increase in recurrent training. The NTSB lists this as well as utilizing good aeronautical decision making techniques both in flight and during the preflight planning.

The NTSB has also cited an increase need for procedural compliance for the commercial aviation sector. This too is a leading cause of accidents in recent times. The cause of the crashes for both the Asian Airlines Flight 214 and the UPS cargo jet crash at the Birmingham, Alabama airport August 2013 were determined to be due to the lack of procedural compliance. The NTSB wants to improve this procedural compliance by insuring good procedures that improve pilot safety. The NTSB has laid out the following guidelines to accomplish this goal:

·         Appropriate training ensures that commercial aviation professionals understand the procedures, how to implement them, and how they contribute to safe operations. Improved stall training, dual engine loss training and gusty crosswind training are some examples.

·         The FAA also should require pilot training programs that emphasize monitoring skills and workload management, and establish best practices for conducting single and multiple emergency and abnormal situations training.

·         Air carriers should also strengthen assertiveness training for first officers and initial operating experience training for Part 135 pilots.

Below are some of the causes of the July 2013 crash of Asiana Airlines flight 214 in San Francisco, CA(Curtis, 2014)

·         The flight crew’s nonstandard communication and coordination regarding the use of the auto throttle and autopilot systems,

·         Inadequate training on the planning and executing of visual approaches;

·         Inadequate supervision of the pilot flying by the instructor pilot

If the suggestion of the NTSB were to be implemented before the time of the flight these causes would be nonexistent. The training, communication and emergency procedures would have insured a safe flight to its destination in San Francisco. Some will say it was due to pilot error and the event would have happened anyways, but if the pilot was better trained and prepared before getting into the cockpit the crew would have never put them in a situation that would have led to the accident.

All of these are good solutions to the problem, but I think the key solution is to instill in all the pilots and operators that safety has to be a priority. I know safety comes at a cost and the bottom line for any company is the most important, however when they are losing aircrafts and lives you cannot just think about the money. In the UPS accident, UPS said, “it has changed procedures regarding stabilized approaches, automation, pilots’ decisions to go around when an approach is shaky, and altitude call-outs on descent. “This accident underscores the shared responsibility that companies and pilots have to ensure proper rest and to report to work fit for duty,” spokesman Mike Mangeot” (Bachman, 2014). Mr. Mangeot explains this situation well; it all comes down to the responsibility of the pilots and the companies to work together to insure safety.

Curtis, T. (2014, June 25). The AirSafe.com News. Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.airsafenews.com/2014/06/ntsb-report-on-july-2013-crash-of.html

Fact Sheet – General Aviation Safety. (2014, July 30). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=16774

Hughes, T. (2015, February 4). NTSB: Selfies led to fatal Colo. plane crash. Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/03/ntsb-selfies-disoriented-pilot-causing-crash/22785475/

Prevent Loss of Control in Flight in General Aviation. (2015, January 1). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/mwl/Pages/mwl7

Strengthen Procedural Compliance. (2015, January 1). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/mwl/Pages/mwl1

UPS Air Crash Was Caused by Crew Errors, Not Fatigue, NTSB Says. (2013, September 9). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-09-09/ups-air-crash-caused-by-crew-errors-not-fatigue-ntsb-says