Category AVIATION &ТНЕ ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

In 1958, the airlines entered into the Mutual Aid Agreement (MAA), also called the Mutual Aid Pact (MAP), which amounted to a self-insured strike fund. This airline cooperative agreement was to be in place for the next 20 years, until deregulation. Under this arrangement, the largest nine trunk carriers in the United States contrib­uted to a fund from which amounts were paid to struck airlines to defray losses directly attribut­able to strike action. During the initial stage of MAP, the period 1958 to 1962, struck carriers received only “windfall benefits”—relatively small amounts equal to nonstruck carriers’ increased revenues realized due to the strikes. In the second stage of MAP, from 1962 to 1969, the plan assured that a struck carrier would recover at least an amount equal to 25 percent of the struck carrier’s normal operating expenses. In the third stage, between 1969 and 1978, the fund paid a struck carrier between 35 and 50 percent

of such expenses. At the beginning of the third stage, in 1970, local service carriers (feeder air­lines) came into the program, along with the trunk carrier Western Airlines.

The major beneficiary of the strike insurance was Northwest, which received over $187 million, followed by National ($120.1 million), and TWA ($37.1 million). The three major contributors to the fund were United, American, and Eastern, none of which had actually benefited from the fund.

The unions fought the MAP from its incep­tion in 1958, first before the CAB, which had to approve the plan, next by lobbying Congress, then by litigation brought in the courts, and finally in the collective bargaining arena. The unions lost on all fronts, and the MAP remained in force until the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA) passed Con­gress in 1978. The ADA provided that the MAP as approved by the CAB would terminate, and that any subsequent plan entered into by the air­lines would be constrained by very specific rules
and requirements. Thus far, the provisions of the ADA have effectively terminated the strike insur­ance fund of the airlines.

It should be noted that the MAP was used to great advantage by Texas International beginning with Frank Lorenzo’s takeover of that airline and during his battles with that airline’s unions in the early 1970s. During the period 1970 to 1974, Texas International received over $11 million from the fund, while paying in only $732,000. Rumblings of discontent over Lorenzo’s activi­ties were heard even from the other airlines.

Prior to 9-11, the legacy carriers copied the Southwest model only by creating subsidiary operations patterned along the lines of South­west, while maintaining their primary business models that evolved during CAB regulation. During the years following September 11, four of the five largest legacy carriers8 entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization, and in November 2011, the last holdout, American Airlines, also sought Chapter 11 protection. American is now in the process of attempting to slim down its cost structure and secure the benefits that ear­lier came to its competitors as a result of bank­ruptcy. Under Chapter 11, these airlines secured approval to make substantive changes to their basic structure, including eliminating employee pension plans, securing reductions in wages, amending work rules, cutting capacity, and downsizing generally. These changes are dis­cussed in more detail in Chapter 35.

A comparison of relevant indicators, includ­ing cost per available seat mile (CASM), between these carrier groups will disclose that the margin between the two groups is narrowing. As the first full decade of the 21st century closed, the legacy airlines had adopted many of the “no frills” standards of the LCCs, sometimes even exceeding the austere approach of the LCCs. In some instances, legacy airlines are now charg­ing extra fees for services that have always been included in the stated airfare. There appears to be no limit to what services the airlines will charge for: checked bags, snacks, early boarding, seat selection, blankets and pillows, ticket change, unaccompanied minor, pets in the cabin, and water (Spirit Airlines). One short-lived idea was a fee for use of the on-board bathrooms (Ryanair).

The next transformative development in the air transportation industry will be the implemen­tation of the NextGen policy (discussed at length in Chapter 35) now in the planning and earlier implementation stages in the Department of Transportation. Simply put, this complete trans­formation of the Air Traffic Control system from one of land-based navaids to a satellite-based nav­igation system, requiring on-board performance avionics and navigation capabilities, will likely drive new point-to-point operational models.

Endnotes

1. Source Air Transport Association—2012.

2. Kahn, Alfred E., The State of Competition in the Airline Industry, Statement before the U. S. House of Representa­tives Commission on the Judiciary, June 14, 2000.

3. Wall Street Journal, December 29-30, 2012.

4. A full-time equivalent is equal to two part-time employees.

5. The first three waves are suggested by Robert W. Poole,

Jr. and Viggo Butler, “Airline Deregulation: The Unfinished Revolution," Reason Public Policy Institute.

6. Earlier in the decade, before the mergers of Delta and North­west and United and Continental, Southwest was number two in size, measured by the number of passengers carried.

7. Miles, Richard B., Testimony before the Aviation Subcom­mittee, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U. S. House of Representatives, Competition in the U. S. Aircraft Manufacturing Industry, June 26, 2001.

8. United Airlines, Northwest Airlines, Delta Airlines, and US Airways.

The United States has the largest, most exten­sive airport system in the world. There are some 19,700 airports in the United States, ranging from world-class international airports to grass strips. Most of these airports are small, private fields, but 5,300 of these airports are for public use. Of these, 3,356 are designated as part of the National Airport System (NAS). NAS airports are entitled to federal aid, and they are categorized by the FAA as follows:

Commercial Service Airports (503 air­ports) are publicly owned airports that have at least 2,500 passenger boardings each
calendar year and receive scheduled passen­ger service. Of these:

382 are primary airports designated as large, medium, small, or nonhub, with more than 10,000 passenger boardings per year; and

121 nonprimary airports with between 2,500 and 9,999 passenger boardings per year

Reliever Airports (269 airports) are desig­nated by the FAA to relieve congestion at Commercial Service Airports and to provide improved general aviation access.

General Aviation Airports (2,560 airports) comprise the remaining airports including privately owned, public use airports that enplane more than 2,500 passengers annu­ally and receive scheduled airline service.

All of these airports are included in the FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.

Since 2007 air traffic hubs are designated as geographical areas based on the percentage of total passengers enplaned in the area. Under this designation, a hub may have more than one airport in it. (This definition of hub should not be confused with the definition used by the airlines in describing their "hub-and-spoke” route structures). Individual communities fall into four hub classifications as determined by each community’s per­centage of total enplaned revenue passengers in all services and all operations of U. S. certificated route carriers within the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and other U. S. areas. For 2004-2006, hub designation is based on passenger boardings at individual airports as designated by the FAA. Classifications are based on the percentage of total enplaned revenue passengers for each year according to the following: Large = 1 percent or more, Medium = 0.25 to 0.9999 percent, Small = 0.05 to 0.249 percent, Nonhub = less than 0.05.

SOURCE: U. S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of Airline Information, Airport Activity Statistics Database (Form 41 Schedule T-3), special tabulation, October 2010.

TABLE 33-1 Domestic enplanements at U. S. airports: 2004-2010.

A limited number of these airports have contracted out some of their operations to private, commercial management, primarily at medium hub airports.2 Airports are further classified by the FAA on the basis of percentages:

9 Large hub airports (at least 1.0 percent of total national enplanements)

• Medium hub airports (less than 1.0 percent but more than.25 percent of total national enplanements)

• Small hub airports (less than.25 percent but more than.05 percent of total national enplanements)

• Non-hub airports

Even though commercial airports are mostly publicly owned, private enterprise plays a sig­nificant role in their operation. Private companies provide 90 percent of the employees who work at these airports, or work for the airlines them­selves, or concessionaires and contractors.

ИА recession is when you have to tighten your belt; depression is when you have no belt to tighten. When you’ve lost your trousers—you’re in the airline business, w

Sir Adam Thomson

|l| s the airline industry approached the end of

t I the millennium, during the first half of the 1990s, there was no consensus that deregulation was an overall success. Economic deregulation was clearly a boon for mass transit; air fares had plummeted as predicted. But the industry was in disarray. Between 1990 and 1993, airlines in the United States had lost an amount of money equal to all the money that had ever been made in aviation in this country since the first commercial flight. If this was what deregulation had wrought, then deregulation was obviously a tragic mistake.

Deregulation had clearly exposed the sen­sitive nature of the U. S. airline industry. This sensitivity results primarily from fluctuating eco­nomic conditions, often driven by geopolitical factors that affect fuel prices and travel demand. While deregulation gave air travel to the masses, it did so at the expense of the airlines’ flexibility
and any financial cushion in the industry. Com­petition had shaved profit margins so razor thin that almost any economic hiccup translated into severe problems for air transportation. The industry has high fixed costs (the cost of labor, aircraft, and facilities) that cannot be reduced quickly during these adverse economic times. Since fuel and labor costs account for over 50 percent of all airlines’ expenses, spikes in the cost of fuel are particularly debilitating to the airlines.

The last decade of the 20th century was quite representative of the plight of the airlines: boom or bust. Jet fuel prices doubled in just four months in 1990 due to the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. Eastern Airlines had been liquidated, fol­lowed by Pan American. Thus deregulation had taken out the venerable airline of Eddie Ricken – backer and as well as the “Chosen Instrument” of America. The remaining legacy airlines took on crushing debt trying to stay in business. The economic downturn produced huge losses for the airlines until 1995. The state of the airline indus­try was so fragile that a presidential commission was established to look into ways to ensure the survival of the industry. There was talk of nation­alizing the airlines.

9 Southwest Airlines

Only Southwest Airlines seemed to understand what was going on. While the major airlines were trying without much success to stop the bleeding, Southwest was raking in record profits; it was also expanding. USAir had acquired PSA in California, and then began to cut back service on the north-south corridor. Southwest came in to fill the void, but at offbeat airports like Oakland and Burbank, and at seemingly ever decreasing fares. Then Southwest entered San Jose to chal­lenge American Airlines. When told that South­west was coming in, American did not even wait for the discount carrier to arrive; it withdrew, anticipating the losses to come in a one-on-one contest with Southwest.

«If the Wright brothers were alive today Wilbur would have to fire Orville to reduce costs. 99

Herb Kelleher, Southwest Airlines, USA Today, 8 June 1994

Southwest was also headed east, for the first time in its history. Now Southwest would be in Baltimore (BWI), next to the seat of power in the District of Columbia. Southwest then was the eighth largest airline in the United States (United was first, followed by American, Delta, Northwest, Continental, and USAir), but it was different in at least one highly signifi­cant way: it had point-to-point routes (the 100 city-pairs most frequently traveled), and did not waste time getting in and out of large hub terminals.

The overall result of these changes in the legacy carriers’ structure is to make them look more like the low-cost carriers with which they have com­peted under deregulation. Not only are the legacy carriers structured more like the LCCs, they are beginning to adopt their operating practices as well. The lower fare structure of the new legacy airlines removes a major advantage previously held by the low-cost carriers. At the same time, the low-cost carriers are beginning to look more like the legacy carriers, causing a convergence between the two groups as they pursue the airline traveler dollar under a maturing deregulated air transportation sys­tem. The third group that makes up what comprises the majority of the domestic air transport system, the regional carriers, have also gone through a transformation as these changes roll downhill.

While the DOT classifies airlines as “majors” (20), “nationals” (33), or “regionals” (31) based strictly on revenues, this classification is not help­ful in differentiating between the actual functions of the various groups. For instance, American Eagle is classified as a “major” airline due to its revenue, but its operations conform to what a regional or feeder airline does. A more practi­cal classifying of airlines would separate them into legacy (or network or incumbent) airlines, low-cost carriers (LCCs), and regional airlines. By now, we know that the legacy airlines are the surviving car­riers that operated during the period of CAB regu­lation; the LCCs are the “no frills” airlines that are either new entrant airlines (since 1978) or airlines that operated wholly intrastate during the CAB period; and regional airlines are those airlines that now operate as feeder airlines, mainly to the legacy carriers. Legacy carriers and LCCs are sometimes referred to as “mainline” carriers. A fourth group of carriers, not discussed here, are “commuters” (61), which operate aircraft of 60 or fewer seats or have a maximum payload of 18,000 pounds or less.

XI The New Legacy Airlines

As a result of the bankruptcies and mergers of the legacy carriers beginning in 2002, this group of airlines has emerged as viable contenders with the LCCs. The new legacy airlines are United, Delta, US Airways (before the pending merger with American), and American Airlines. Dur­ing the first decade of the 21st century, these airlines (representing also the absorbed Conti­nental, Northwest, TWA, and America West) contracted their networks, route miles, number of employees, and number of aircraft, while focus­ing on down-sizing, cost-cutting, and improving productivity.

They began to emphasize Internet ticket pur­chasing and distribution and web check-in. These newly oriented carriers began to mimic other LCC practices by eliminating or reducing ser­vices and amenities that had come to be standard as the legacy brand, such as meals, soft drinks, snacks, and pillows.

By 2008, these airlines began to levy fees, in addition to the base airline fare, for services and amenities that had always been complimentary to their passengers. These add-on fees include, depending on the airline, ticket change fee, ticket cancellation fee, booking fee for phone or in per­son, seat selection fee, unaccompanied minor fee, pet in cabin fee, fees for checked bags, oversized bags, and overweight bags, early boarding fee, seat selection upgrade fee, wireless Internet fee, blanket and pillow sets fee, inflight entertainment fee, and inflight food and beverage charges. See Figure 35-23 for a depiction of select fees and the locations where offered for purchase. See

Tables 35-3 and 35-4 for a listing of airlines and airlines’ imposed fees for optional services.

The legacy carriers have, however, main­tained business and first class services, which render much higher yields than standard. The legacy carriers also have the advantage of flying more profitable international routes as a result of global deregulation and Open Skies agreements.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution also had its genesis in the Brit­ish occupation of the American colonies. The

Amendment provides, in relevant part, that the people have a right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreason­able searches and seizures. . and that such right “shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. .

Since the adoption of the Bill of Rights in 1791, a large body of law has grown up around the interpretation in various fact situations of what “unreasonable” means, and what “probable cause” means, including opinions of the United States Supreme Court and lower federal and state courts. By prior law, property taken by the police to be used in evidence is not admissible in a criminal proceeding against the accused if the seized evidence has been taken in contravention of the Fourth Amendment or the cases interpret­ing it. A number of exceptions to the require­ment of having a warrant to search have been articulated by the courts (for example, no warrant is necessary to search a person who commits a crime in the presence of an officer of the law, or a person who is under arrest). Similar types of exceptions have been articulated to the question of the sufficiency of the facts necessary to secure a warrant, where a warrant is required before a search of premises can be lawfully made. If the facts supporting the warrant are not legally suf­ficient, then the warrant is unlawful and anything seized is inadmissible in a criminal proceeding.

The question arises, then, whether drones may be used in law enforcement to fly over a person’s property to view what is on the prop­erty, for instance, as a basis to secure a warrant to enter the property in order to seize evidence to be used in a criminal proceeding. There have been two cases that bear on this question.

In Summers of California v. Ciralo, 487 U. S. 207 (1986), the Supreme Court had before it a case where the police had received an anony­mous tip that the accused was growing marijuana in his back yard. The back yard was enclosed by a high fence that precluded viewing what was in the back yard from ground level. A police offi­cer in an airplane flew over the property from a

1,0 foot altitude while in navigable airspace and was able to clearly identify the marijuana from the air. A search warrant was obtained and executed the next day, seizing the marijuana plants on the private property.

Prior law had established that a police offi­cer may look and see whatever is in plain view, and he may use this as a basis to either seize unlawful contraband or as a basis for a lawful search warrant. The court held that since the marijuana was in plain sight, using the naked eye, from a place in the navigable airspace (the NAS, which is in the public domain), the accused had no reasonable right of privacy. The view by the naked eye of the backyard was reasonable (as the same would be from a high truck or double decker bus from the street). Other specific legal analyses of the case are not permissible here, but suffice it to say that the court held that the over flight of the accused’s back yard and the viewing of it from 1,000 feet in the NAS, was a legitimate basis for the search warrant.

In the second case, Florida v. Riley, 488 U. S. 445 (1989), a similar situation was before the Supreme Court. The accused had a green­house on his private property, the contents of which could not be viewed from any ground level public place. Relying on an anonymous tip that marijuana was being grown on the prop­erty, a county sheriff using a helicopter circled twice over the subject’s property at 400 feet. Through openings in the roof of the greenhouse, the officer could see with the naked eye growing plants that he identified as marijuana. A search warrant was obtained and the premises were searched, and the marijuana plants were seized as evidence.

The court held, along the lines of Ciralo above, that helicopter flights at 400 feet above people’s property are routine, and that what is viewable from that position in the NAS is not protected under the Fourth Amendment, in spite of FAA regulations limiting low flight for fixed – wing aircraft in the navigable airspace. The FAA limitation is based on safety considerations, not

privacy expectations, and does not necessarily apply to helicopters.

Both of these cases rely on the police being where they were legally allowed to be, on the “plain view” doctrine that allows police to see what is there to be seen using the naked eye, whether through a window or otherwise, and that they were using normal and routinely used aerial vehicles from which the sightings were made. The use of drones, however, is not normal or routine in many venues, and drones frequently use specialized imaging and sophisticated tech­nologies, like infrared and thermal applications, to view the ground. There will no doubt be many other distinctions that will be argued under Fourth Amendment principles as UAVs become more prevalent and are increasingly used by the government. At this point, it is still safe to say that the incorporation of UAV technology in the NAS, as projected by the recent statutory law and by the plans of the FAA, will result in many legal contests between citizens and the government.

Endnotes

1. P. L. 108-176.

2. Atlanta, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, Cleveland, DC Metro, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Las Vegas Valley, Memphis, Minneapolis-St. Paul, New York/Philadelphia, Northern California, North Texas, Orlando, Phoenix, Seattle, South­ern California, South Florida, Tampa.

3. Multilateration is a means of navigation using the mea­surement of the difference in distance between two or more stations at known locations that broadcast signals, enabling the determination of a “fix.”

4. Portland, OR; Anchorage; Kansas City, MO; New Orleans; Pittsburgh; San Francisco; Cincinnati; Cleveland; and Andrews Air Force Base.

5. In 2009, 50 percent synthetic fuel blends were created from a process known as Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. In 2011, a biofuel known as Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) can be mixed up to 50 percent with standard kerosene.

6. As a result of the Freedom of Information suits filed against the DOT, the FAA released information in April 2012 disclosing the identities of holders of Certificates of Authorization (COAs) and Special Airworthiness Certificates in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC).

From the basic idea and structure set forth in the Treaty of Rome, the European Union has created itself and its actual structure and composition through a painful process of evolution. The origi­nal idea of union from such a diverse population and separate systems of government, with its violent history, was bound to be difficult. Yet, it is said that “nobody would have deliberately designed a government as complex and as redun­dant as the EU.4”

By 1986, the EC had grown to 12 member states.5

The European Union came into existence with the Treaty of Maastricht, signed in 1992. By 1995, the addition of Austria, Sweden, and Fin­land brought the number of countries in the EU to 15. In 2004, 10 more countries were admitted.6 By 2007, the total membership had risen to 27 with the addition of Bulgaria and Romania.

Along the way came the European Central Bank, which is the central bank for the countries that have adopted the Euro, the EU’s common cur­rency. It controls monetary policy for that currency and its subscribing countries. It has inherited a central and very important role as certain Member States of the EU have demonstrated financial insta­bility and weakness that threatens the very existence of the EU. This instability pits the more “indus­trious” Member States against those that might be termed “profligate” by some, the most glaring extremes of which are Germany (the world’s fourth largest national economy) and Greece.

Although the purposes of the community are increased economic stability, expansion of eco­nomic activities, securing an improved standard of living, and the creation of a genuine, barrier – free internal market, the nature of the culture and the people of the various countries in the Union are playing a divisive role as the EU attempts to accomplish its original goals. The result appears to be that some of the more industrious and effi­cient countries are being called upon to “bailout” other Member States that have accumulated sig­nificant debt and that do not have the financial strength to continue to operate their govern­ments, given their obligations. As of 2013, the EU is in crisis.

From a technical perspective, atmospheres have no “end”; they just get progressively thinner. During the 1950s, it was generally known in the scientific community that, beyond some altitude, the physics of flight changed drastically. The principles for flight in the atmosphere, or the sci­ence of aeronautics, were fairly well understood. The principles for flight without an atmosphere, or the science of astronautics, were less under­stood. Some believed that these two disciplines needed some definition as to their separation.

There is no “bright line” that determines where outer space begins. NASA accords astro­naut status to any individual who travels above 80 kilometers (50 miles). Yet atmospheric drag becomes evident on reentry at 75 miles above the earth’s surface.

The venerable Federation Aeronautique Internationale,8 which was founded in 1905, has ever since that time been accepted worldwide as the arbiter of aeronautical records. Through this private organization, the physicist Theodore von Karman in 1957 proposed a formula for the cal­culation of a boundary that would establish the beginning of space. One of the characteristics of aeronautical flight is the concept of lift, which is a function of speed through the atmosphere, among other things. The thinner the atmosphere, the faster the airplane must fly in order to gain the lift necessary to remain aloft. Karman pro­posed an altitude of approximately (the exact altitude depends on certain variables) 100 kilo­meters (62.1 miles) as the separation point based on his calculations that a space vehicle would have to travel faster than the speed necessary to obtain orbital velocity in order to maintain aero­nautical lift. In other words, aerodynamic lift becomes less than centrifugal force.

This became the internationally accepted boundary to space, and it is known as the “Kar­man line.” The Federation Aeronautique Inter­nationale is now the recognized keeper of all records that are established in astronautics.

The Commercial Space Act resolved the con­fusion. It also specifically approved the development and use of commercial reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) for launch and landing within the United States. In addition, the fledg­ling commercial space launch effort received a significant boost by the law directing NASA to use commercial launch services “when required in the course of its activities” and to “plan mis­sions to accommodate U. S. commercial provid­ers.” The statute prohibited the government from using any missile that was formerly used by the Department of Defense for national defense pur­poses as a space transportation vehicle, which effectively took the government out of the sat­ellite launch business. The statute did provide for seven exceptions to be used in the case of national defense overrides.

The Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 (CSLAA)

This legislation was passed by Congress in December 2004. The law is “designed to promote the development of the emerging commercial human space flight industry” and creates the struc­ture for the regulation of private space activities. It also frees the fledgling industry from the patch­work of regulations that had been applied to it.

Its overriding premise is that the federal government should not “over regulate” this new industry for fear that, in so doing, it will stifle the innovation necessary to make the concept succeed. Those now in the forefront of experi­mentation are compared to the early pioneers in aeronautical flight at the beginning of the last century. These current pioneers need a regulatory environment that will allow them room to experi­ment and take chances as they develop the space concepts of the future.

The government has decided that regulation will not be the enemy of innovation. Remember­ing the early days of aviation presented earlier in this book, we saw that the first regulation of aviation by the federal government occurred in 1926, some 23 years after the Wright brothers’ first flight. As with the development of law after the first Sputnik orbited earth, it was clear that law must follow, not lead, technology. Just as government oversight of aviation safety gradu­ally developed as aviation itself developed, so too will government oversight of the commercial space industry evolve.

According to statements made by FAA rep­resentatives to Congress, the government is plac­ing its oversight emphasis on the protection of the public, not the participants. Given the experience of the industry regarding the failure rate of expend­able launch vehicles, which is about 10 percent of all attempts, it is recognized that space launches are a relatively dangerous activity. FAA efforts are directed, therefore, not to the over-protection of those who voluntarily place themselves in harm’s way as a part of the industry itself, but to the bystanders of the process, the public. In this regard the oversight process employed by the FAA has been successful. There have been no deaths or seri­ous injuries, nor any significant property losses, as a result of FAA-monitored commercial launch activity.

It may be expected, however, that once com­mercial launch activity is removed from federal launch sites, with their isolated locations and ranges, and with their strict safety regulations and controls, there may be greater likelihood of harm to the general public. The regulatory regi­men of CSLAA provides for launch operators to maintain an under-layer of liability insurance, but also requires the federal government to indem­nify or reimburse operators for losses to third parties in excess of that insurance up to the sum of $1.5 billion. The removal of this financial risk is important to private investment.

Ш U. S. Airlines (Part 121) 1982-Present

he NTSB wishes to make clear to all users of si the following list of accidents that the infor­mation it contains cannot, by itself, be used to compare the safety either of operators or of air­craft types. Airlines that have operated the great­est numbers of flights and flight hours could be expected to have suffered the greatest number of
fatal-to-passenger accidents (assuming that such accidents are random events, and not the result of some systematic deficiency). Similarly, the most used aircraft types would tend to be involved in such accidents more than lesser used types. The NTSB also cautions the user to bear in mind when attempting to compare today’s airline sys­tem to prior years that airline activity (and hence exposure to risk) has risen by almost 100% from the first year depicted to the last.

[1] In 1900, there were 8,000 automobiles registered in the United States. By 1920, there were 8 million automobiles registered. Wall Street Journal 5/17/03.

Endnote

Endnote

[4] http://www. nasm. si. edu/collections/artifact. cfm7id =A19180001000

[5] September 21, 1908—A record for distance and duration that brought a $1,000 prize from the Aero Club de France.

2. October 7, 1908—The first flight with a female passenger, Mrs. Hart O. Berg.

3. October 10, 1908—A record for distance and duration with a passenger.

4. November 18, 1908—An altitude record of 90 meters, earning a prize of 1,000 French francs from the Aero Club de Saitte.

Endnotes

[7] Shulman, Unlocking the Sky: Glenn Hammond Curtiss and the Race to Invent the Airplane, Harper and Collins, 1903.

2. Dayton History Books Online http://www. daytonhistory books. com/the_wright_brothers_18html.

3. Dayton History Books, ibid.

[8] An account of Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Company, 1925-1950, Frederick B. Rentschler, 1950, Pratt & Whitney Archives, East Hartford, CT.

Endnote

[10] The Post Office, which would continue to award contracts, designate routes, and estab­lish schedules;

Endnotes

[12] Barnum, John, What Prompted Airline Deregulation 20 Years Ago, http://library. findlaw. com/1988/ Sep/l/129304.html.

2. Caves, Richard E., Air transport and its regulators: an industry study, Harvard University Press, 1962.

3. Martha Derthick & Paul J. Quirk, The Politics of Deregula­tion 241 (1985).

[13] Immediate automatic market entry in certain cases.

2. Shifted the burden of proof in route author­ity cases from the requirement to show that public necessity and convenience (PNC) was required (in order to secure the route) to one requiring opponents to show that the new award/entry would be inconsistent with PNC.

3. Allowed carriers to obtain authority to fly unused routes of other carriers.

4. Established a range of fares within which carriers could immediately select fares on their own without CAB approval.

5. Established notice procedures to facilitate abandonment of unprofitable routes.

6. Provided a 10-year Essential Air Service Program to ensure air service to small communities.

7. Provided employee protective measures for workers dislocated by changes in the air­lines’ procedures.

Endnotes

[15] 459 U. S. 1145, 103 S. Ct. 784, 74 L. Ed. 992 (1983).

2. 14 C. F.R. 255; Regulation ER-1385, 49 Fed. Reg. 32540 (Aug. 14, 1984), aff’d United Airlines v. CAB, 766 F. 2d 1107 (7th Cir. 1985).

3. See Bankruptcy Code, 11 U. S.C § 1113, et. seq. Under this amendment to the Bankruptcy Code, the debtor in bankruptcy may petition the Bankruptcy Court to void or modify union contracts and impose lower pay scales or more reasonable work rules. The Court must find (after presentation of evidence) that wage and benefit cuts or changes to work rules are necessary for the debtor (airline) to successfully emerge from bankruptcy and that these changes are equitable and not arbitrary. This was not the case when Lorenzo unilaterally canceled the Continental labor agreements.

[16] Gandt, Robert, Skygods, p. 289.

Endnote

[18] The airport gives up the opportunity to make any profit in its operations since any sur­pluses are credited to the airlines.

2. The airport gives up the right to make auton­omous decisions over capital expenditure programs because of provisions in the agree­ments, called “majority-in-interest” (Mil) clauses.

Endnotes

1. Public Law 84-159.

2. 42 U. S.C. section 7401, et seq.

3. California, Massachusetts, and Texas.

4. Aircraft must be built to meet noise certification standards established by ICAO, found in Annex 16, Environmental Protection, V. 1. The first generation of jet aircraft (707, DC-8) preceded the Annex 16 standards. These are Stage

[20] aircraft. Chapter 2 of the Annex applied to aircraft built before 1977, and these are referred to as Stage 2 aircraft. Chapter 3 of the Annex covered the latest production air­craft, and are referred to by the FAA as Stage 3.

[21] It must be developed and implemented at the same time that the present radar-based sys­tem is running full tilt.

[22] It proposes technology that has yet to be perfected.

[23] It requires significant financial invest­ment in new ground-based equipment by government and new onboard equipment by flying users of the new system, estimated to be in excess of $40 billion.

[24] Airlines are reluctant to invest in the required onboard equipage until the FAA can demonstrate with some confidence when the government-funded technologies will be available for use in the new system.

[25] It requires training in the use of new equip­ment and in procedures by government, mili­tary, and civilian users of the new system.

Endnotes

[27] A large-caliber muzzle-loading gun able to fire heavy projectiles.

2. Refer to Chapter 8 for a review of the impact of Scientific American on the early aviation community.

3. Refer to Chapters 6 and 7 for a review of the Smithson­ian’s impact on the early work in aeronautics by Samuel Langley and the Wright brothers, and to Appendices 1 and 2 for comments by Dr. Alexander Graham Bell at the Smithsonian in 1913 about their experiments.

4. On July 17, 1969, the day after the launch of Apollo 11 for the moon landing, the Times issued a “correction” to its 1920 mocking editorial of Goddard’s 1919 treatise. It concluded: “The Times regrets the error.”

5. Refer to Chapter 13 for a discussion of the Guggenheim family and their contributions to early aviation and research in the United States.

6. Roswell would become famous as the site of the alleged alien space ship crash in 1947.