AirportBusiness Blogs

… much of the discussion centers on economic recovery and pending security regulations for business aviation. Some 100-plus leaders of fixed base operations and others were on hand for the reformulated meeting hosted by the National Air Transportation Association. The Leadership Conference is now being held in tandem with the NBAA Schedulers & Dispatchers Conference, being held at the convention center here the rest of the week.

Richard Aboulafia, VP of analysis for the Teal Group Corporation and a favorite on the prognostication circuit, led off the NATA event saying that “I feel very good about saying the worst is over. We’ve got stabilization. The next step is recovery; then growth.” During the past year, according to Aboulafia, business aviation in North America has seen a 30.5 percent reduction in utilization, with the most notable drops being in the mid-size and smaller corporate aircraft segments.

Aboulafia also says that the used aircraft segment has also made the turn from its downward spiral and “things have stabilized.” Yet, there is still a glut of sorts in the marketplace, which will in turn impact new aircraft deliveries for some time.

He is optimistic, he says, about business aviation long term, and forecasts that some 10,117 new aircraft will be delivered over the next ten years, at a value of some $168.2 billion. That said, Aboulafia sees a sluggish 2010. Looking forward he says the key barometer for business aviation is corporate profits, and he recommends tracking the Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov) for those numbers.

On the security front, one of the original leaders of the Transportation Security Administration – Asa Hutchinson – was on hand and expressed concern that the agency has been without a leader for the past year. A central issue regarding that appointment has been the unionization of TSA employees, which he opposes. Comments Hutchinson, “I’m opposed to the unionization of TSA because it’s a security organization.” He fears that TSA could find itself having to negotiate with union bosses to transfer employees or make other moves.

Regarding business aviation, Hutchinson says that there is a danger of TSA shifting its strategy and treating bizav like the airlines. It is not the same threat, according to Hutchinson, who comments that TSA should “analyze the risks, first and foremost” before imposing new security requirements on the industry. He does point out that TSA’s original Large Aircraft Security Program proposal was met with such industry opposition that the agency pulled it for a rethink. In all more than 7,000 industry comments were sent to TSA, which got the agency’s attention. “Your voice was heard,” he says.

Thanks for reading. jfi

… one can hope that the focus is on balance – that is, balancing the need for safe transport versus strangling an ailing industry with onerous regulations.

The U.S. Senate today begins four separate hearings into the Christmas Day attempted bombing of a Northwest airliner in Detroit, how intelligence failed to “connect the dots”, and other issues related to aviation security. Those expected to testify include the heads of DHS, the FBI, and the director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). As The Wall Street Journal reports, the NCTC was created after 9/11 to provide a central clearinghouse for intelligence among the various U.S. agencies. This has become the focal point of the discussion related to the Christmas incident.

For years my favorite word when discussing Congress and Washington was ‘reasonableness’ … getting those that regulate and legislate to be reasonable. Over the past several years that concept has been tossed out the window. ‘Balance’ may be a more reasonable expectation.

The concept of balance occurred to me during a recent visit to the Denton (TX) Airport north of Ft. Worth. The City of Denton has been pushing hard over the past six years to turn its general aviation airport into a dynamo of economic development, and will continue that push over the next five years. Quentin Hix, the Denton airport manager, sees the need for balance and is overseeing the installation of perimeter fencing and other security equipment to make the airport more secure for his tenants.

Explains Hix, “We along with other general aviation airports are faced with the challenge of increased federal regulation. TSA is focusing on security at general aviation airports. That’s going to be a huge challenge to us.

“It’s one of those things where the more you jump up and down and say ‘Hey, here we are’ the more you’re recognized as a place that could become a poster child for new regulations.”

Is the new perimeter security at Denton intended to head TSA off at the pass? Answers Hix, “It’s to try and get ahead of the curve, yes. But it’s more than trying to get ahead of anticipated regulations; security is one of our major missions of service here. Look around this airport and you can see hundreds of millions of dollars of investment. Part of what we feel obligated to provide is security; safety of operations; and unprecedented service to our general aviation users, be they individual pilots or corporate airplanes.”

At Denton and scores of airports across the U.S., officials are seeking to find the balance between protecting assets and people versus stifling commerce. People employed in aviation understand the need for security … but there’s pretty much universal agreement that better leadership from on high is needed.

An aside to today’s Congressional hearings comes in the form of Errol Southers’ announcement that he is withdrawing his nomination to head up TSA. The reason his nomination has been held up for months is because of his apparent support for unionizing TSA employees. So, while all the talk on Capitol Hill is about security, the nation’s safety comes down to a debate about unions. Something wrong here.

Attention Congress: Recognizing that reasonableness is beyond your comprehension, at least give some consideration to balance.

Thanks for reading. jfi

For once, however, the homeowners and the airport seem to agree.

The FAA proposes to lower the bottom altitude of Class B airspace in the area to straighten the approach and departure of aircraft operating in/out of Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson Airport (ATL). That would lower the bottom of Class B to 5,000 feet over PDK, which is one of the busiest general aviation airports in the Southeast. Many aircraft operating at PDK are jets that operate efficiently only at high altitudes and need to get up there fast. True, they should be cleared quickly to a higher altitude, but the fear is that the clearance will come slower than currently. Departing aircraft could be held down longer and landing aircraft pushed down earlier. And, any way you look at it, the plan will compress more aircraft (many of them VFR) into less airspace and that does have a bearing on safety. Efficiency and safety concern Pat Epps, Epps Aviation, PDK, as does anything that makes life more difficult for his customers. Pat would like to see the proposed altitude changes stopped.

Those with homes in the area would like it stopped too, but for different reasons. They worry about increased pollution, noise, and, of course, safety.

The push for keeping the status quo is gaining, it seems. John Heneghan, a member of the Dunwoody, GA, City Council, publishes reports in his popular Blog. WSBTV has covered the issue in some detail. Perhaps most importantly, AOPA—the most active and effective defender of general aviation airports—is actively involved.

This should be interesting!

We’d love to post your comments. Please click on the comment tab at the top.

… is the target of a new study being directed by professor James Smith of the American Public University System. Dr. Smith, who is also president of the airport/disaster consulting firm Smith-Woolwine Associates (www.swith-woolwine.com) , on Tuesday addressed a conference call hosted by the Airports Committee of the National Air Transportation Association.

As many in industry know, general aviation airports often play central roles in disaster response. Getting supplies and response personnel to an affected region can frequently be accomplished more directly by accessing a GA facility, rather than by using a larger commercial airport which may be much further away from where the aid is needed.

Mike France, director of regulatory affairs for NATA, says the association “is very pleased to be assisting Dr. Smith in his research into the role of general aviation airports during disasters. This type of research helps to quantify what those of us in the industry have known for a long time, that general aviation airports provide many benefits both economically and logistically to their surrounding communities.

“It’s very important for members of communities surrounding GA airports to understand the value that their airport can play in a disaster situation”

To accomplish his task, Dr. Smith plans to survey some 500 GA airports by March 1 while also conducting ten site visits to airports. Regarding the latter, he is looking for airport recommendations, using the following criteria …

… an airport that has had a successful or unsuccessful experience with a disaster mission;
… airports that want to get into the disaster response arena and are curious about what it will take; and
… airports that have encountered barriers to developing a disaster response regimen.

During a phone conversation following the NATA meeting, Dr. Smith asked for my thoughts on some airports that might be good for site visits, particularly in the West and Southwest. Thinking first from an infrastructure perspective, my recommendations were Alliance Airport north of Ft. Worth; Double Eagle Airport west of Albuquerque; and, Reid-Hillview Airport in San Jose.

Now he’d like to hear from the folks who are actually operating GA airports or tenant operations. He can be reached at (540) 763-3068 (office); (540) 239-1206 (cell); or jfsmith@swva.net.

Thanks for reading. jfi

I can put up with taking my shoes off and full body scans (although my scan would not be a thing of beauty). I will stick to the rules and not joke, will stand in the lines and try not to cause problems. I’ll keep my seat for the last hour of a flight, and will not put anything on top of my laptop or in my lap.

On the other hand…

Every time there is another scare, we demand more from passengers. It seems the customer—the passenger—catches the brunt of the problems. Still, I could willingly handle that if only the guvmint would…

Study the masters of security, the Israelis. Their record is near-perfect since the 1960s, they keep traffic moving and react quickly to a crisis without closing airports. Why would we not study their methods?

American passengers are put through many inconveniences and hassles, yet our guvmint seems more terrified that we might hurt someone’s feelings than that our system protects and works. I am personally not willing to continue down that road, but would like to know for sure that we are working like hell to study and adopt everything the Israelis do to make flight more secure AND to reduce the hassle factor for our passengers.

You can get online many of the steps the Israelis take, and I urge you to do so. For one small example, go to: http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/11/yeffet.air.security.israel/index.html.

We’d love to post your comments. Please click at the top of the page.

… and trade association reps encourage industry firms to provide input on a recent notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). On Tuesday, the National Air Transportation Association and the Aircraft Electronics Association co-hosted a free webinar to discuss TSA’s NPRM, which would establish a new Part 1554 titled “Aircraft Repair Station Security” that would require any repair station, foreign or domestic, certificated under 14 CFR Part 145 to carry out a standard security program (SSP). According to NATA, the SSP would be required to describe:

• Access controls for the facility, aircraft, and/or aircraft components;
• Measures for identifying individuals with access to the facility, aircraft, and/or aircraft components;
• Procedures for challenging unauthorized individuals;
• Security awareness training for employees;
• The name of the facility’s designated security coordinator;
• A contingency plan; and 
• The means to verify employee background information.

TSA wants input, they say. According to AEA vice president Ric Peri, TSA “is recognizing” the diversity of the repair station segment. Is the company on-airport or off-airport? Is it a full-service repair station or a specialist in component services, a la an avionics shop? In light of that diversity, NATA vice president Eric Byer cautions against implementing a “one size fits all” approach. He adds that TSA is seeking input from industry on the applicability of the reg on companies located at airports that only handle aircraft under 12,000 pounds – that is, should they be exempt?

Another concern is that the NPRM will allow TSA to petition FAA to revoke/suspend an operating certificate, should it believe a company is a security threat. NATA’s Mike France says the association is pushing for “a layered appeals process”, one in which TSA isn’t the “sole decisionmaker”.

For more information, contact www.nata.aero or www.aea.aero.

Thanks for reading. jfi