By: Bob Myers

Tue, 18 Nov 2014 14:24:00 +0000

By the way, no, there are no licenses with “test pilot” stamped on them. Getting a job as a test pilot, as far as the FAA is concerned, requires only that one hold a commercial pilot certificate (necessary to legally fly “for hire”) plus the appropriate ratings and endorsements (e.g., multi-engine aircraft, instrument flight, etc.). And all this does is to ensure that a person has the necessary experience, knowledge of systems and regulations, etc. as required for that certificate. An official endorsement to fly a particular aircraft (a 747, say) is a “type rating” – but how could you test for something like that in the case of an aircraft which has never existed before, and whose design is being revised literally as you are flying it? That’s part of what the whole “experimental” category of aircraft is about, and you cannot fly an aircraft which is licensed in that category in commercial service. It has to complete its testing and be approved by the FAA for such service (i.e., issued its “type certificate”) before that can happen – something which clearly had not yet happened in the case of SpaceShip Two.

]]>

By: Bob Myers

Tue, 18 Nov 2014 14:22:00 +0000

Len, here’s one where I am going to disagree with you, pretty much completely. The last thing the commercial space industry needs at the moment is more regulations, especially ones imposed in the heat of the moment as a “we have to do something” response to the Virgin Galactic accident or any other such event.

Is there any reason at all to think that more regulation would have prevented this? We have seen similar failures, many involving fatalities, throughout the history of aircraft and spacecraft development, not to mention the history of transportation technology in general. And why should we think that the government is in any better position to be telling this industry what to do than the industry itself? NASA certainly doesn’t have an accident-free record, nor does the DoD. And Congress simply does not have the expertise required. Yes, we need regulation to ensure the safety of the PUBLC while such work is going on – but I believe the current regulations imposed by the FAA and international law are more than adequate here.

This is a field which has inherent dangers, and the men and women who are involved in the testing of these craft are aware of that to a greater degree than anyone else. They accept the risk as an unavoidable, necessary part of this work. Some of them will pay for the advancement of this technology with their lives, and they deserve every bit of honor and respect we can give them. But when such loss happens, calling for “more regulation” is generally the wrong response; it is pointless, does nothing but makes the proponents of those regulations feel better temporarily and adds significant and unnecessary cost and delay to such programs.

If there was even a bit of evidence that Scaled Composites or Virgin Galactic was knowingly cutting corners in the design or flight procedures, then the cure for that lies in the civil courts. NOT in burdening fledgling industry with additional regulations written by those who are not directly working in this new field.

]]>

Comments on: Are There Rules for People Going into Space?

By: Bob Myers

By: Bob Myers