June 2022
She said, “If we want to keep leading the world in aviation, we can’t wait for technologies to come to us.” Does anyone understand this political mumbo-jumbo? You know when a politician is clueless when they make up words like Advanced Air Mobility Ecosystem. Ecosystem? Or Echosystem? Whaaat? World’s leading producer of light aircraft: Italy’s Tecnam. World’s leading producer of piston aircraft engines: Austria’s Rotax, a division of Canada’s Bombardier. “American” companies Cirrus and Continental are owned by Communist China, shameful and dangerous. This woman, like most politicians and bureaucrats, is completely out of touch with reality. Why don’t they stop all the jingoism and mumbo-jumbo and admit they are working to over-regulate a sector of aviation that doesn’t really exist, essentially big battery quadcopters. I see smoking holes in the ground. Won’t get me on one of those Rube Goldbergs.
June 2022
Good points about the rest of the world.
She also misses Bayraktar TB2, and a Turkish UAV that has a Ukranian engine design. Albeit the US has advanced drones, including a big one that may not be supplied to Ukraine out of concern that technology could be revealed to Putinssia when one is shot down.
IMO there is a safety concern about UAVs colliding with aircraft and falling on people. Thus FAA should be paying attention.
Isn’t the FAA already on the job? Whether or not it needs pandering politicians is a big question.
1 reply
June 2022
▶ system
From what I here the FAA has been working with DOD, NASA, and industry professionals. Mark did a great job of giving the 30k view of what is happening. To your point it is new frontier with lots of opportunity to learn as you go and uncover situations never before considered.
June 2022
Kent, as you are one of the leading suppliers of jingoism to the AvWeb forums, I defer to your instant recognition of it; pot meet kettle. But where in the world did you get the idea that politicians are experts in any technical field other than getting (re-)elected?
Given that fundamental raison-d’etre, what you are mistaking for hyper-nationalism (both here and abroad) is nothing more than nest-feathering. This announcement is from a representative of a state which has many aviation-related employers (who no doubt contributed to her getting the job) pushing a piece of legislation (no doubt crafted by representatives from said employers) that would drive more federal funds to said employers, current and potential, and (presumably) to their employees who elected her. “Follow the money.”
Kansas is a bright-red state that has spearheaded many, many such pieces of pork on its own behalf. Strange that you leap to such high dudgeon when its lone blue representative pushes something that would be good for aviation.
The operative word in the title is “coordination”. Frankly, anything that has a remote chance of improving the collaboration among the scrum of startups and governmental agencies flooding into this currently unregulated mode of transportation, has my “Sure, why the hell not?” approval.
I doubt that either of you are chopper pilots, but the current legislation undergoing FAA peristalsis will, for the first time, give the right-of-way to an unmanned aerial vehicle over a piloted one. Rotorcraft and UAV’s operate in the same uncontrolled airspace, yet the likelihood of a chopper pilot even seeing a drone before impact is nil. They will be nothing more than flying air-mines with the right-of-way. You want to get indignant over FAA stupidity, I’d suggest you direct your ire in that direction.
1 reply
June 2022
▶ system
“But where in the world did you get the idea that politicians are experts in any technical field other than getting (re-)elected?”
ROFL.
Indeed.
And many don’t even use their prior abilities - the mayor of North Saanich BC was an engineer but is confused and weak.
