U.S. Senators James Inhofe, R-Okla., and Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., introduced a bill on Thursday that would establish a National Center for the Advancement of Aviation (NCAA). The NCAA is intended to focus on supporting the development and distribution of aviation and aerospace science, technology, engineering and math (STEM)-based curriculums, workforce development, economic and safety data and research sharing, and providing a forum for cross-disciplinary collaboration. It would be operated as a private entity and funded by a percentage of the interest from investment credited to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
“In the more than 100 years since Wilbur and Orville Wright conducted their historic flights at Kitty Hawk, our nation has seen aviation in the United States grow, powered by the individual passions of pilots, aviators and countless others,” said Sen. Inhofe. “To continue this legacy, our bipartisan legislation would create an independent, stakeholder-led national center where all aviation and aviation-related stakeholders can work in concert to address the demands and challenges associated with a safe and vibrant national aviation system.”
Aviation organizations including the Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA), Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) signed a letter (PDF) in support of the proposal, which was introduced as S. 3360 (PDF).
Sorry, but the answer to increased government regulations stifling aviation is NOT more government regulation.
Government IS largely the problem. How is more government going to fix it? When are we going to wake up?
Whenever I see the corporatese term “stakeholder” I think that who may have the most significant financial presence is who will be served. Paul Poberezny once told me the FAA had not done anything to get the average guy to 200 feet AGL. Doesn’t appear to be anything here to change that.
Isn’t this what NASA is supposed to do?
Yes! NASA’s first “A” is “Aeronautics”. I’ve talked to people on their aero side in the past and they get a small fraction of the total NASA budget. Boeing goes to the UK for all it’s commercial airplane low speed wind-tunnel tests. NASA can match the quality of the data, but not the speed of testing that Boeing needs for product development. Instead of a new agency, they just need to fund the aero side of NASA!
Agree with both of you.
When we were kids no educational initiatives were required. Scott Crossfield, John Glenn and Neil Armstrong were what got me into engineering school.
The three steps to running a government agency:
Step 1) Form a committee to draft a mission statement and request a budget to fund the agency;
Step 2) Populate the agency with as many people as possible;
Step 3) Complain to Congress that the reason you haven’t accomplished anything is that you need a bigger budget and more personnel.
Adding a layer of government involvement to promote aviation is unnecessary and wasteful. There are already private and industry initiatives and nobody interested in an aviation career needs more bureaucracy to achieve their goal.
It isn’t apparent to me that the previous commenters have read the bill. I also oppose more government, and I don’t read this bill as chartering another government agency. Quite the opposite.