AircraftOwner Online

If you are thinking about buying an aircraft for use in your business in 2011, you need to know that the income tax laws have changed recently and, if you follow a whole bunch of complicated rules, these changes can substantially reduce your cost of owning and operating that aircraft.

First, a warning.  I am not a tax attorney.  I know enough about tax to get myself in trouble in a hurry.  Everyone’s tax situation is different, and the rules and regulations change constantly.  If you are contemplating the purchase of an aircraft and are interested in the actual tax consequences that will apply to your situation, you should contact an accountant who specializes in aircraft taxation.  There are several good ones around the country.  Your regular CPA generally is not going to know about any of the special rules relating to aircraft.  Some CPAs may not even know that there is stuff they don’t know.  If you just use your regular CPA, without verifying that he or she knows about aircraft accounting procedures, you are asking for trouble down the road.  Use a specialist.  It is worth the extra expense.  Also, this article is only about federal income tax.  It does NOT address other types of taxes like sales taxes, use taxes, ad valorem taxes, or other similar taxes and fees.

As in most years, favorable tax treatment in 2011 depends upon whether you are buying a NEW aircraft or a USED aircraft.  The treatment for both types of aircraft has improved dramatically over the past years, but it is VERY different between the two types.

In general, there are three types of expenses that we are concerned with in this article:  “standard” depreciation; “bonus” depreciation; and “Section 179” expenses. 

The most-talked-about of these three items is “bonus” depreciation.  The term “bonus” refers to the fact that the income tax laws currently require that aircraft which can be depreciated usually have to be depreciated over a schedule of either five or seven years (depending on the type of use).  At this rate, the taxpayer would not be able to deduct more than about 20% of the cost of the aircraft in the first year of ownership.  Beginning in 2004, as a way to stimulate the economy and create jobs, however, the government began using the concept of “bonus” depreciation, which allowed people who ordered and placed into use new aircraft to “front load” the depreciation deduction in the year they made the cash outlay.  This had the result of stimulating people to buy new aircraft, which, in turn, kept people employed building them.

For 2011, the way in which bonus depreciation works, is that 100% of the cost of new aircraft, and of new equipment added to used aircraft, on contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2008, and placed into service prior to December 31, 2011, may be taken as a depreciation expense in the year of purchase.  If you have a large liability for taxes in 2011, this is huge.  It has the effect of allowing you to deduct the cost of your aircraft from your taxable income, resulting in less tax due for the year 2011, and might even result in a tax refund.  The current law changes in 2012, the “bonus” is not as much, but is still nothing to sneeze at.  Up to 50% of the cost of the new aircraft can be deducted in 2012 if the aircraft is put into service during that year.  There are even some circumstances where the aircraft owner can receive an extension of up to one year (to December 31, 2013) to put the aircraft into service and still write off 50% of the purchase price as “depreciation” in the year the aircraft is placed into service.  Again, this can result in less income taxes due, or even a tax refund.

“Regular” depreciation is applicable for all aircraft which are legitimately used for business (as distinguished from “hobby”; “personal use”; or “entertainment”).  The rules regarding regular depreciation haven’t really changed much.  Depending upon the type of business use to which the aircraft is put, the most you can depreciate in any one year is dependent upon the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery system (MACRS) formula, which is only slightly “front loaded”.

Section 179 expensing is different.  It allows you to deduct certain regular operating expenses, within strictly controlled limits.  For 2011, those limits have been made much more liberal than they have been in the past.  For USED aircraft, as well as NEW aircraft, a taxpayer who invests up to $2,500,000.00 in an aircraft may take up to the first $500,000.00 in expenses incurred in 2011 as deductible expenses in 2011.  Again, this can have the result of making the cost of purchasing and operating a used aircraft much less onerous, since much of the purchase cost may be recovered in tax savings in year one.  [Although Section 179 expensing applies to new aircraft as well as used aircraft, in MOST cases, it will be more beneficial for the owner of the new aircraft to use bonus depreciation rather than Section 179 expensing.]

In 2012, this expensing will become much less generous.  At that time, unless there is a change made before the rules become effective, only the first $625,000.00 of investment is eligible to be considered for Section 179 expensing.  Only a maximum of $125,000.00 can actually be expensed in year one.  The benefit of Section 179 expensing is phased out for investments in aircraft in excess of $625,000.00

Can you imagine being alone with the Wright Flyer for a few hours? Or the Spirit of St. Louis? Or the Bell X-1? Or the Apollo 11 Command Module? A "significant" donation to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum made on behalf of the National Transportation Safety Board Bar Association allowed us to have just such an evening recently. As the Gala Finale to an Evening Devoted to Air Safety, the Bar Association awarded its presigious Annual Joseph T. Nall Aviation Safety Award to Herb Kelleher, the founder and long-time CEO of Southwest Airlines, during a black-tie evening at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.

Mr. Kelleher might not seem, at first glance, to have been an obvious choice for a "safety" award. But, when you hear about the Billions of passenger miles, in Millions and Millions of revenue flights, over more than three decades, without a single passenger fatality, and then realize that over the same period of time, Southwest Airlines remained profitable, while other airlines drowned in a sea of red ink, the point is made.

Mr. Kelleher and his airline are living proof that an airline can be profitable without sacrificing a committment to safety.

There was perhaps no more-fitting place at which to honor Mr. Kelleher than the Air and Space Museum, as he has for many years, sat on its Board of Directors. He was welcomed to the IMAX Theater stage by the Director of the Air and Space Museum, Lt. Gen. John R. Dailey (USMC, Ret.), the current Director of the Museum. After an emotional speach, during which he credited all of the accomplishments of the airline to its employees, a trademark of his management style -- a mutual love-fest between labor and management -- we were feted to a lovely catered dinner in the "America By Air" section of the museum, wedged between the forward fuselage of a Boeing 747 and a Ford Tri-Motor, under a DC-3 and a Curtis Jenny, while overlooking the monuments of Washington, DC through the floor to ceiling glass walls of the museum.

A private event at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum is almost like a dream. I hope that all of you can one day attend such an event.

A few weeks ago, I had one of the best experiences of my aviation life. As part of the annual conference of the National Transportation Safety Board Bar Association in Washington, DC, we got private tours of the NTSB laboratories. We were given access to the room where the only people to listen to the actual cockpit voice recordings after a fatal accident actually sit around and listen and create the transcript that is made public. We were shown the lab where Flight Data Recorder information is extracted from the black boxes recovered from accident scenes (they also take data from panel-mounted and handheld GPS receivers, engine monitors, and other electronics). We got to explore the structures laboratory where they examine large and small pieces of aircraft (and other modalities) for signs of what caused them to fail. We were taken to the animation labs, where the NTSB specialists design and create animations to demonstrate, for the Board and for the public, the last few minutes of a crash, and all of the relevant information from multiple sources, in an audio-visual presentation which is easy to understand.

The next day, we were taken by bus to the NTSB's accident investigation academy near Dulles Airport, where investigators from the US and from around the world are trained in the fine arts of accident investigation. This academy was built after the families of the victims of TWA flight 800 recognized the expertise of the investigators who worked tirelessly for years to determine the manner in which that aircraft came apart in a blaze over Long Island Sound. Thousands of pieces of the wreckage were recovered from the water and from the bottom of the Sound and were painstakingly reconstructed in a hangar at one of the old Grumman Aircraft plants. This reconstruction was then taken apart, moved to the academy, and carefully reconstructed there as a teaching aid for future investigators. The families approached Congress and asked for money to be allocated to develope an academy dedicated to this work so that others could learn from their tragedy. Out of respect for the victims and their families, the families control access to the reconstruction, and no photographs are allowed. We were very fortunate to have been able to get access to the reconstruction.

Words are simply inadequate to convey the sensations one experiences when the double doors open from a building hallway, and you come face-to-face with some 40% of a B-747 showing obvious signs of an explosion and of ripping apart, literally, at the seams. A climb up a tall staircase allows you to look into the fuselage from an area just behind the cockpit, each seat, in the condition in which it was found, placed exactly in the location it occupied right up until the aircraft came apart under those unfortunate passengers. It is like looking into a tomb, only without the bodies. To me at least there was an overwhelming feeling that this was where over 200 people died.

On the floor, dwarfed by the wreckage of the 747, are other aircraft fuselages, including a Cessna that suffered an in-flight fire. Although the instructor who showed us around took pains to show us the way that the smoke trails from the rivet holes indicated the initial point of origin of the fire, the chared interior of an aircraft type in which I had many hours of flying time was quite sobering. Engines, props, control cables, spinners, and other debris from numerous fatal accidents were on shelves around the room. For the professionals, they serve as instructional aids. For me, they served as a stark reminder of the consequences of mistakes.

Having now spent quite a bit of time with NTSB personnel, both in the field and at their offices and the academy, I am more than ever impressed with this small, independent government agency. No one that I met reminded me of a "typical government bureaucraft." Everyone with whom we came in contact was not only an expert in his or her field, but was clearly keenly aware of the seriousness of the mission of the agency. The entire NTSB -- Board Members, Judges, staff, investigators, and others -- numbers only about 400 people spread around the country, and ready at a moment's notice to assist other countries around the globe. They do more with less than just about any other government agency I can think of. As Americans, we can be proud that we have this agency to lead the world in pursuing safety in transportation. As passengers and pilots, we can and should also be thankful that we have this agency to search for causes, and to make safety recommendations in an effort to keep us all as safe as we can be.

In September 2010, I spent a most-enjoyable 90 minutes with brand new Administrative Law Judge Alfonso J. Montaño. I was very pleased to have been the first “journalist”, either from the aviation community or from the legal community, to have been afforded the time to interview him. He was introduced to the remainder of the aviation legal community the following morning.

    A native of the Taos, New Mexico area, Judge Montaño has an easy, broad smile which he flashed many times during the course of our meeting, particularly when the discussions turned to his newly-found love of flying. He has been married to the same woman -- Trish, a third-grade teacher -- since 1982. They have two children: a son who is in a Doctoral program in Psychology; and a daughter, who is a college senior pursuing a degree in Art History. His son enjoys flying with Dad; his daughter had a bad experience with a discovery flight years ago and has yet to take advantage of Dad’s offers to take her up. He remains hopeful that she will come to understand, and not to fear, his new passion.

    Other than flying, Judge Montaño is a huge history buff, with a special interest in the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. In fact, when I asked him to tell me about his favorite flight to date, he told me that he flew to Tangier Island, in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay, which the British had used as a staging area for their assault on Baltimore during the War of 1812. Judge Montaño also loves music of all kinds. He plays the guitar, but confesses that he, “hasn’t advanced much since high school.”

    I confirmed that Judge Montaño will be taking over the Southeastern Circuit that recently-retired Judge William A. Pope, Jr. had served for so long. I also confirmed that Judge Montaño does not have an existing backlog of cases that were to have been decided by Judge Pope since his retirement. Those cases have been handled by the other three Administrative Law Judges.

    Judge Montaño has been in rigorous training to understand his new role as an NTSB ALJ. But he is not starting from scratch by a long shot. He has been in public service all his adult life, and has been an Administrative Law Judge for the past 15 years, first working to decide appeals concerning eligibility for Social Security benefits in Portland, Oregon. He also spent much of his career assisting in Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse cases, first as an investigator, later as an assistant attorney, then as a Trial Attorney for the Department of Justice, and finally as an Administrative Law Judge. For the past 11 years Judge Montaño presided over adversarial hearings for the Department of Health and Human Services involving civil monetary penalties, terminations, sanctions and exclusions of physicians, nursing facilities, and other health care providers from participation in the Medicare Program. Although his office was, by then, in Washington, DC, he conducted hearings around the United States. He has an interest in all things medical and is looking forward to seeing how medical issues are presented in the aviation legal context.

    Judge Montaño is not at all shy about how much he is looking forward to his new job. He said he is still in shock that he was actually picked for this position, because it involves all three of his passions: aviation, law and medicine. Judge Montaño has clearly been bitten by the aviation bug. He has longed to be a pilot since he was in third grade and a bi-plane flew over a field in which he had been resting. He remembers that the aircraft was so close to him that he could see it when the pilot looked down and waved to him from the cockpit (it was a crop duster). Since then, he had always wanted to learn to fly, but never had the opportunity. Life got in the way.

     But he told his wife of his dreams of flying, and, on Christmas morning of 2004, she gave him what he described as the best Christmas present he ever got -- a Discovery flight at Manassas airport. When he landed, he was a changed man. He knew he would be a pilot. So he has spent his spare time flying when he could and finally received his private pilot certificate in 2006. He rents 172’s, 172RG’s and has flown some Pipers and a 182. He has a close friend who took flying lessons at about the same time, at the same FBO, and they now fly together with their wives to visit friends and family. So far, he has flown as far North as Pennsylvania, as far Northwest as Wheeling, West Virginia, and as far South as upper North Carolina. He is looking forward to training for his instrument rating as soon as he can.

    Judge Montaño told me, “taking flying lessons changed my life. It changed the way I think about things, the way I analyze things, and the way I prioritize things.” He can barely contain his excitement about now having all cases that cross his desk involving aviation.

     We in aviation can count ourselves lucky that three of the four Administrative Law Judges that hear our appeals now understand, and are even passionate about, flying aircraft. The NTSB is not permitted by law to request or to require that applicants for the position have any aviation background at all, and, in the past, many of them have not had any background. We are truly fortunate that we now have someone who has filled out the application for an FAA Medical Certificate, gone through ground school, taken flight training, worked hard to earn his certificate, and experienced the joys, terror, and endorphins that flying solo can produce. When we as aviators go before him, we know that he will be able to put himself in our place and understand what we faced when the decisions we made resulted in an allegation that we violated one or more FARs.

    Judge Montaño is now getting ready to start sitting in on final hearings conducted by the other Administrative Law Judges to see how they do what they do, particularly how they manage to articulate an oral final decision from the bench at the conclusion of the final hearing, which is something that very few other judges anywhere else in our legal system have to do. Usually, Judges can adjourn the hearing, thank the parties and their counsel, go back to his or her home or office, think about the case for a while, and issue a written ruling. The NTSB Administrative Law Judges have found that issuing an oral decision immediately, while the parties are still present, speeds up the process tremendously, and gives closure of a sort to both the Airman and the FAA. It is a difficult skill to master, and Judge Montaño confesses that the prospect is somewhat daunting to him.

    He is also interested in observing how the NTSB Administrative Law Judges handle “Emergency” cases, since the specialized procedure we use does not exist in any of the other Federal Departments. He finds the concept intriguing and is curious to see how it actually works in practice. And, of course, he is very curious to see how his medical background will come into play with FAA aero-medical issues on appeal.

    Regardless of the case, however, Judge Montaño wants everyone to know that he will do his best to listen to the evidence objectively, to treat the parties and the lawyers with respect and professionalism (while demanding the same from them), to provide the parties with a full and fair hearing of their case, and to rule in an objective and impartial manner. He knows full well that his decisions can cost someone a career or can let unsafe practices continue to represent a hazard to the general public. He has had the better part of 15 years to get used to the idea that, no matter how he rules, at least one party (and sometimes more than one party) will be upset with him for the way he has ruled. He has shouldered that burden before, and will continue to shoulder it now for the NTSB.

    The NTSB Administrative Law Judge position is a real plum of a job. For most Administrative Law Judges, once they have been appointed to the NTSB position, they keep the job until they retire. For the time being, the talk around the Office of Judges is now that ALJ Roger Mullins, who is 65 years young, and who has served as an NTSB ALJ for the last 21 years, can no longer be called, “the Kid” -- Judge Montaño has now acquired that moniker. I know that all of you join me in wishing Judge Montaño well in his new position. I, for one, am looking forward to practicing before him, and to helping to introduce him to Sun N Fun, Airventure, and NBAA, where he can seriously fan the flames of the aviation fire that burns within him.

     So there I was, settling in to watch the first ever NIGHT airshow at Oshkosh AirVenture 2010. I was looking forward to seeing the reactions of the folks around me to this relatively-new form of aviation entertainment, having really enjoyed it myself the last two years at the Lakeland Sun N Fun fly-in.  The first acts involved aircraft with really – no I mean REALLY—bright lights fitted to them in all the darndest places.

    This year, one of my clients was the manufacturer of a kit for a new experimental aircraft who had just been negotiating with the MIDO and a DAR to obtain an airworthiness certificate in time to bring their flying prototype to Oshkosh (they made it just in time), so my legal mind turned to thoughts of what these night performers with their bright lights had to do to get permission to fly their aircraft modified in this way. I am guessing that most of these guys needed to upgrade their alternators to crank out the amperage needed to run all these lights. They may have also needed to upgrade the wiring. Depending upon where the lights were located, they probably needed engineering to show that the new mounts for the lights would not have any structural impact on the airframe, and that the lights would not blind the pilot. A little paperwork, some engineering, an inspection or two, some discussions, but overall not that big a deal.

    Then the next aircraft comes out, a bi-plane with pyrotechnics strapped to each of its four wingtips and several other places around the aircraft, and I start thinking, “How did THAT conversation at the MIDO go?” I’m thinking that it was something like this:

INSPECTOR:

“Hi Gene, what can the FAA do for you today?”

GENE:

“Well, I’ve got a little project I’ve been thinking about and I need your approval. I was wondering if you could just give me your signature on these papers here, and I’ll get out of your hair.”

INSPECTOR:

“Sure, Gene. Let me just have a little look at what it is you’ve got there.”

GENE:

“It’s really just a little cosmetic work on the ol’ Ag-Cat. Nothing you need to concern yourself about, really. It’s all totally safe. Could you just sign? I’m kind of in a hurry. You sign right here.”

INSPECTOR:

“I’d love to help you out Gene, but you know how headquarters is these days. I really have to at least look over your stuff. Let me see what you’ve got.... Hmmm. I see you’ve got some tubes on all the wingtips here, are they handholds for your wingwalker or something?”

GENE:

“Well, not exactly. They hold the Roman Candles.”

INSPECTOR:

“I’m sorry, Gene. My hearing is really shot from all those years flying DC-3s. I could have sworn I heard you say ‘Roman Candles’. What are the tubes for again?”

GENE:

“Yeah, well we need the airplane to show up better ‘cause we’re going to be flying it at night, so we are just using a little pyro to let people see where the wingtips are. Nothing major, you understand, just some fireworks to entertain the kids. Kind of like a little Fourth of July show. Sign here, and I’ll be gone.”

INSPECTOR:

“Gene, did you just tell me that you want to put EXPLOSIVES on your wings?”

GENE:

“Only enough to light up the sky for about ten minutes. It’s really no big deal. I’m really in a hurry, could we kind of speed this up.”

INSPECTOR:

“Umm, how many pounds of explosives, exactly, will be on each wingtip?”

GENE:

“I don’t know. It’s in all that paperwork somewhere. Can’t be too much. Maybe 20 pounds? Don’t really know. But they tell me it’s totally safe.”

INSPECTOR:

“And all these wires here on the wings going up into the cockpit. What are those?”

GENE:

“Oh those. Just the way we get the on-board computer controller to sequence all the pyro. Not a big deal.”

INSPECTOR:

“Don’t you have a wingwalker in your regular act?”

GENE:

“Yes, Sir, I do. Little thing. Cute as a bug, too. Wanna meet her?”

INSPECTOR:

“No thanks, Gene. I’m just kind of wondering how she feels about all these wires out there where she is supposed to be walking while you are flying her around at 100 knots. Aren’t they kind of a tripping hazard?”

GENE:

“She’s just as agile as a little monkey. You wouldn’t believe it. She loves these wires. They seem to relieve the boredom for her. Trust me. It’ll be OK. Could you just sign? I’m really running late.”

INSPECTOR:

“Gene, let me understand this. You want the FAA – me in particular – to approve you taking eighty pounds of explosives up on your FABRIC-COVERED bi-plane; that you are going to fly AT NIGHT; with a computer of some kind strapped into the cockpit; and then you’re going to send hi-intensity electrical signals to BLOW THEM UP – not once, but repeatedly for ten minutes – so that you can fly through trails of your own sparks, while performing aerobatics, AT NIGHT AT LOW LEVEL? Do I have that right?”

GENE:

“Ummm, yeah. That’s pretty much it.”

INSPECTOR:

“Seems safe to me. Approved. Have a nice day Gene. NEXT!”

    And so then, as I am really enjoying the cooler air, the music, the artistry, the swirls of light and fireworks viewed through wafting airshow smoke and exhaust, I think to myself, Charlie, you’ve got to find out the name of that Inspector. He could sure make your clients’ lives much easier.

I am sitting in awe watching the heroic rescue of the trapped Chilean miners and my thoughts have turned to all of the heroic acts that aviators perform. Our aircraft, fixed wing and rotorcraft, give us amazing capabilities to do good. Hundreds of organizations around the globe, from non-profits like Civil Air Patrol, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, Angel Flight, Corporate Angel Network, Brothers to the Rescue, and Doctors Without Borders; to missionary flight departments in Africa, South America, the Orient and the Caribbean; to for-profit air ambulance companies and Medevac helicopter companies, exist for the sole purpose of helping others when disasters strike or when supplies are needed, and other modes of transportation just can’t supply the need. We are blessed both to have such services should we need them, and, as pilots, to be able to assist others through our participation and support of such services.

And yet, just within the past few weeks, the FAA has put new regulations in place which will cause those organizations to make harder choices, to invest money in new technology and training, and to coordinate more with the Federal Government when making these flights. It seems a little inconsistent – until you look at the underlying facts. A lot of people have been hurt and killed in accidents involving rescue and volunteer “missions”. Many pilots, especially those who are not professionally trained as rescue pilots, are willing to take risks in their flying simply because the circumstances surrounding the flying that they do are so “emergent”. As a former Angel Flight Pilot and as a former Civil Air Patrol Mission Pilot, I will admit that I have succumbed to that sense that the urgency of my “mission” justified departures from my ordinary practices when I knew that there was really no excuse for abandoning standard operating procedures, no matter how “emergent” the circumstances might have been.

In recent years, we have lost many people, pilots, medical aircrew, patients and family members. Many of the accidents that caused these deaths (and most of these accidents do tend to be multiple fatalities) were preventable had standard operating procedures been used. But, using the excuse of exigent circumstances, pilots have launched in aircraft that are not airworthy, or into meteorological conditions that exceeded the capabilities of their aircraft and/or their training, with less than adequate rest, with less than adequate planning; or other circumstances which, under other circumstances, they would have chosen not to accept. Once airborne, pilots have taken risks with weather, unfamiliar fields, previously-untried procedures, or other “heroics”, many times with fatal results. Of course, if the pilots get lucky and survive, bringing their passengers the life-saving care they require, they are often lauded in the press for their acts of heroism. Who among us would not like to be recognized publicly as a hero responsible for saving lives?

Unfortunately, in many instances what really happened is that the pilot took unnecessary chances with his or her own life, as well as the lives of others on board, by knowingly exceeding his or her own limitations and/or the limitations of the aircraft, all because of psychological motivations that he or she might not fully understand: the desire to be heroic, the desire to fly in a non-routine and exciting situation, the “knowledge” that violations of FARs or standard safety practices would be overlooked given the noble intent of the flight, the thought that just this one time it will probably work out alright, or other such mental gymnastics.

The true facts are that very few pilots are adequately trained and equipped to conduct real emergency operations. We see on television Coast Guard Helicopter crews that do the impossible and make it look like just another day at work. That is because, for them, and for their equipment, it IS just another day at work. These circumstances are precisely what they train for. They fly practice emergency missions every single day. How many of do that? They have developed specialized crew coordination procedures. How many of us have? Even they have strict rules and standard operating procedures that they follow religiously, even if it means leaving an injured person un-rescued because the risk to the crew is simply too great. How many of us are psychologically prepared to make those kinds of choices?

Going back to the rescue of the Chilean miners, the press has reported on the massive influx of technical expertise from around the world, and on the painstaking efforts to train, rehearse and prepare for the rescues. The fact that the teams had over two months to consider the possible problems and to address each one of them, along with several weeks to actually communicate with the trapped miners and to provide them with materials, counseling, medical and psychological assistance, did nothing to make the event any less heroic or spellbinding. It did, however, prevent it from ending in catastrophe, when all the hopes and dreams for a happy ending by people around the world would be dashed.

The new FAA regulations on Air Ambulances and Medivac operations appear to be required, since our ability to focus honestly on our own limitations and those of the aircraft we fly seem to be too easily subordinated behind our genuine desires to use our talents and our aircraft for good and noble purposes. I would urge every pilot to participate in some way in the various humanitarian organizations that utilize pilots and aircraft, including those listed above. But, when you do so, do so with an honest appraisal of your own limitations and those of your aircraft. Learn to ignore the voice that tells you that the effort to save or assist another human being gives you license to fly in ways you have never tried before, or in circumstances with which you have never dealt previously. If you can honestly undertake a mission of mercy that is within your limitations and those of your aircraft, by all means do so – it is a wonderful feeling to complete such a mission successfully and to know that you used your skills to help others. But if you cannot honestly say that the mission is within your capabilities or those of your aircraft, work to get properly-trained and equipped people to do that particular rescue. I can’t imagine a worse feeling than knowing as you are about to crash that you not only did not complete your mercy mission, but that you killed a patient, a family member and medical personnel all of whom were relying upon you to keep them safe.

For the last several years, I have been attending the National Business Aircraft Aviation Association (NBAA) convention.  To be honest, before I started getting involved in the business of assisting people with the purchase, leasing, sale and structuring of business jet transactions, all I knew about NBAA was that it was the organization for the “heavy iron” folks.  I never even knew that they had an annual convention in the US and others around the world.

Beginning last year, however, NBAA made a conscious effort to recognize that the term “business aircraft” does not simply apply to business jets.  Rather, as NBAA and AOPA have pointed out, most business aviation is actually performed with piston and turbo-prop aircraft, many of which are owner flown by single pilots.  Accordingly, both NBAA and AOPA have dedicated a portion of their programs to what they are now calling “light business aircraft”. There are many, valuable workshops and seminars that are held concurrently with the exhibits that are extremely relevant and interesting even for pilots of light aircraft.   That is only one reason why those of us who don’t utilize business jets to do business should consider attending the NBAA conventions.

Even before the conventions specifically incorporated “light aircraft”, it still had much to offer owners, pilots, mechanics, flight schools, FBO’s and others who did not operate turbine aircraft. 

The NBAA convention is decidedly “high class.”  The exhibit hall must contain at least one million square feet of show space, and must be near an airport that can be essentially shut down and taken over for a week when the show is in town.  Thousands of hotel rooms must be available close to the convention center where the exhibit hall is located.  This is the fourth largest trade show in the world, and only a few cities can meet its needs.  For the past several years, the show has been in Orlando, Florida at the Orange County Convention Center, with the static display at Orlando Executive Airport (KORL).  This year (from October 19 – 21) the conference will be held in Atlanta, Georgia at the Convention Center, with the static display at Fulton County “Charlie Brown” Airport (KFTY).  Next year, the conference is scheduled to go to Las Vegas, Nevada.

When I say “high class”, I mean it.  All of the major manufacturers display their latest wares, and multiple announcements are made at the show.  Although the recession has toned down some of the over-the-top excesses of prior years, you will still find phenomenal displays from all of the major manufacturers of piston aircraft, standing right in the same booths as their heavy-iron brethren.  Cessna, Piper, Hawker/Beechcraft, Diamond, Mooney, Pilatus, Aerospatiele, Robinson Helicopter, Lycoming, Continental, and all of the other big names are there, along with all of the major avionics manufacturers, FBOs, MRO facilities, interior shops, paint shops, and everything a piston pilot could ever need or want.  But, instead of being arrayed in a steaming hot hangar, or out on the dirt somewhere as in Oshkosh or Sun N Fun, at NBAA, you walk on plush carpet, in air-conditioned comfort, in business attire.  Even the static display has air-conditioned, carpeted tents erected right on the ramp.  Some of them serve a gourmet lunch to those in attendance at tables with linen tablecloths and full silver service.  The major manufacturers know that they can never tell who their next customer will be.  Some guy who has been using a Mooney in his business for the last decade may now decide that the time and economic circumstances are right for him to move into a brand new jet.  So it is worth it to them to feed a few of us, too, in order to make sure that everybody that comes to their display feels that they were treated like royalty.  Here we are talking primarily about Gulfstream, Bombardier, Dassault Falcon, Airbus, Boeing, Embrear, and, depending on the year, Cessna, Piper and Hawker/Beechcraft.

But, even if you don’t get to eat in the big, fancy tents, you are greeted by attractive men and ladies who want to give you an ice-cold bottle of water for free.  You are taken from the convention center to the static display on luxury coaches with comfortable seats and air-conditioning.  Other luxury coaches also run in a constant loop between the convention center and numerous hotels in the area.

If you do business with some of the firms who exhibit at NBAA, you will probably be invited to one or more private parties, where fun, food and drink is the order of the evening.

Don’t get me wrong.  I dearly love Oshkosh and Sun N Fun.  They each have their own charm and magic.  But for a look at how the other half (ok, 2%) lives, there is simply no place like NBAA.

I hope to see many of you in Atlanta.  If you can’t make it this year, please try to book for next year in Vegas!

I just spent a most-enjoyable 90 minutes today with brand new Administrative Law Judge Alfonso J. Montaño. I was very pleased to have been the first "journalist", either from the aviation community or from the legal community, to have been afforded the time to interview him. He will be introduced to the Washington, D.C. aviation legal community tomorrow morning.

A native of the Taos, New Mexico area, Judge Montaño has an easy, broad smile which he flashed many times during the course of our meeting, particularly when the discussions turned to his newly-found love of flying. He has been married to the same woman -- Trish, a third-grade teacher -- since 1982. They have two children: a son who is in a Doctoral program in Psychology; and a daughter, who is a college senior pursuing a degree in Art History. His son enjoys flying with Dad; his daughter had a bad experience with a discovery flight years ago and has yet to take advantage of Dad's offers to take her up. He remains hopeful that she will come to understand, and not to fear, his new passion.

Other than flying, Judge Montaño is a huge history buff, with a special interest in the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. In fact, when I asked him to tell me about his favorite flight to date, he told me that he flew to Tangier Island, in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay, which the British had used as a staging area for their assalult on Baltimore during the War of 1812. Judge Montaño also loves music of all kinds. He plays the guitar, but confesses that he, "hasn't advanced much since high school."

I confirmed that Judge Montaño will be taking over the Southeastern Circuit that recently-retired Judge William A. Pope, Jr. had served for so long. I also confirmed that Judge Montaño does not have an existing backlog of cases that were to have been decided by Judge Pope since his retirement. Those cases have been handled by the other three Administrative Law Judges.

Judge Montaño has been in rigorous training to understand his new role as an NTSB ALJ. But he is not starting from scratch by a long shot. He has been in public service all his adult life, and has been an Administrative Law Judge for the past 15 years, working to decide appeals concerning eligibility for Social Security benefits, first in Portland, Oregon and then in the Washington, DC area. He also spent much of his career assisting in Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse cases, first as an investigator, later as an assistant attorney, then as a Trial Attorney for the Department of Justice, and finally as an Administrative Law Judge. He has an interest in all things medical and is looking forward to seeing how medical issues are presented in the aviation legal context.

Learn more about my interview with Judge Montaño in the October Issue of AircraftOwner.