Comment: March 2012 Archives

The absence of a specific licensing requirement for the command of a multi-crew commercial aircraft is one of those things the aviation world has always taken for granted. An air transport pilot licence with a type rating allows the pilot to fly a multi-crew aircraft either as commander or co-pilot.

Conventional wisdom suggests commanding a crew requires the exercise of expertise and qualities a co-pilot would not necessarily have, so why does this loophole in the licensing system still exist?

Most good airlines provide their co-pilots with some kind of command preparation before promoting them. But even the good carriers usually consider pilots for command when their position on the seniority ladder puts them next in line for the left-hand seat, so this is scarcely a meritocracy.

At a time when the whole pilot licensing system is at the threshold of major change, it is right that this anomaly should be examined. The International Civil Aviation Organisation is already leading the change from subjective pilot performance assessment before awarding a licence to providing comprehensive descriptions of required competencies, so it looks even more odd that there is no description of the competencies required of an aircraft commander. Fortunately, ICAO and the European Aviation Safety Agency are preparing to change all that.

(This first appeared as the second leading article in Flight International 27 March)

The absence of a specific licensing requirement for the command of a multi-crew commercial aircraft is one of those things the aviation world has always taken for granted. An air transport pilot licence with a type rating allows the pilot to fly a multi-crew aircraft either as commander or co-pilot.

Conventional wisdom suggests commanding a crew requires the exercise of expertise and qualities a co-pilot would not necessarily have, so why does this loophole in the licensing system still exist?

Most good airlines provide their co-pilots with some kind of command preparation before promoting them. But even the good carriers usually consider pilots for command when their position on the seniority ladder puts them next in line for the left-hand seat, so this is scarcely a meritocracy.

At a time when the whole pilot licensing system is at the threshold of major change, it is right that this anomaly should be examined. The International Civil Aviation Organisation is already leading the change from subjective pilot performance assessment before awarding a licence to providing comprehensive descriptions of required competencies, so it looks even more odd that there is no description of the competencies required of an aircraft commander. Fortunately, ICAO and the European Aviation Safety Agency are preparing to change all that.

(This first appeared as the second leading article in Flight International 27 March)

Protests against the European Union's decision to unilaterally apply its Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) to the global aviation industry are understandable, but so too is the bloc's refusal to suspend the directive.

Nations, airlines and associations opposed to the EU ETS champion instead a global system for regulating the industry's carbon emissions, developed through the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). But the EU is right to be sceptical; ICAO has so far had 15 years in which to produce results, to no avail.

The EU's stubbornness and resulting threats of retaliatory action, while worrying for European airlines, have at least spurred on ICAO's efforts. Its chief executive has vowed to have a proposal on the table by the end of this year. For the EU to back down now would risk losing that long-awaited momentum.

In the meantime, however, it is increasingly difficult to dismiss threats of reprisal as an attempt to call the EU's bluff. China's ambassador to the EU was quick to quash rumours that the country has blocked its airlines from purchasing Airbus aircraft because of the EU ETS, yet Beijing has already issued a directive banning the country's airlines from complying with the scheme. Russia and the US have similar legislation in the pipeline.

Nine of Europe's aviation big guns have written to their governments appealing for further consultation. While the industry awaits ICAO's offerings, the EU should consider that showing a degree of flexibility - while sticking to the principle of the EU ETS - may be the only way to avert a trade war.

(This article first appeared as the second leader in Flight International 20 March)

South America's economic revitalisation has yet to translate into a rebirth of the continent's largely dormant aerospace industry outside of Brazil, but there are promising signs.

In the 1980s, it was possible to wonder which country - Argentina or Brazil - had the aerospace industry with the brightest outlook. Brazil's Embraer certainly seemed to have the lead, with active production of Bandeirante and Brasilia regional turboprops and a basic military trainer called the Tucano. But this was before Embraer's spectacular 1990s growth spurt fuelled by regional jet sales, and Argentina seemed just as poised - having produced the respected Pucara attack aircraft and Pampas jet trainer - for a similar lift-off.

Argentina, however, regressed as Embraer surged forward. By the end of the 1990s, the government had transferred management of the state aerospace industry to Lockheed Martin. The new Argentine aerospace company - FAdeA - is back under the management authority of the state. Argentina must be careful to avoid a repeat of history, but FAdeA appears to be blossoming, with several active upgrade projects. FAdeA is also developing the IA-73, a primary trainer and successor to the EMB-112 Tucano.

Other South American countries have also started to foster aerospace clusters. Many of them, including Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Colombia and Venezuela, have recently designed their own unmanned air vehicles.

The Embraer KC-390 programme can become a continent-wide catalyst for industrial growth. Brazil has signed letters of intent with the industries of Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Peru to participate in the programme. Already, Embraer is helping Colombia's aerospace industry to complete upgrades for the air force's fleet of Tucano trainers.

It will still take many years and a new level of sustained commitment before most South American countries become reliable industrial partners.

The state-owned industries must learn to overcome the ebbs and flows of aerospace programmes. A critical test may come in Chile. The local aerospace company ENAER is relatively advanced, but has fallen on lean times. For many years, ENAER's fortunes were tied to Embraer's ERJ-145 programme as a structures supplier, now that 50-seat jet has seen sales vanish. ENAER may still play a key role in the KC-390 and IA-73 programmes, but it is likely to need strong state support - and patience - to survive.

(This article first appeared as the main leader in Flight International 20 March)