The Reckless Sheriff of the Air Mobility Wild West

Please reference the following LinkedIn post — I provide a screen shot should the Sheriff block me

I am dubbing Paul Pocialik the Sheriff because he posts quite a lot on LinkedIn and those posts, whether on developing and certifying air taxis or drones, or UAS Traffic Management, are often in the same line as this post. Dangerous detail void hype. And the air mobility domain is clearly the Wild West. I created this post to ensure this is seen and understood. (Many folk do not spend the time reading sub-posts.)

If you view this thread, you will see the sheriff makes a claim that unspecified FAA type certification regulations are “onerous” and as such should be “re-imagined”. The problem is he proves no specifics. I assume in this case that would involve FAA Parts 23 and 64. (Which are the recommended changes for eVTOLS from ASTM). I as well as others pushed back on the sheriff. Not only trying to seek details but then to criticize the approach when it was clear they were not forthcoming. If someone is going to state current certification criteria is “onerous” from a time and cost standpoint, the least they could do as a “savant” who specifically mentioned the “devil is in the details”, is provide those details to ensure safety is not sacrificed. Given the government is a bureaucracy I have no doubt there may be something out there that could or should be done. But only if we get in the weeds and seek not avoid the light.

Over the past four years I have been pushing back on the autonomous vehicle industry (ground and air) for hyping, misleading the public and putting the public in danger for no reason. As well as utilizing an untenable development approach that will never lead to an autonomous vehicle. I then started paying attention to connected systems, air traffic management, drones and air taxis. Many of which are eVTOLs. I noticed the same patterns there. Lots of Silicon Valley Holiday Inn Express geniuses and those piggybacking on them. What this is all leading to is the literal collapse of these industries and harming people for no reason. (Unfortunately, NASA and the FAA are enabling this.) Unlike the ground side, the air domain will not put up with multiple or many crashes. One significant crash, especially with a child for family involved, will doom air mobility. I confront these folks because I believe doing less, especially nothing, is enabling. I ask you to do your homework on the matter and do the same. Looks like we need a new sheriff in town.

(The Sheriff is welcome to post here and on LinkedIn)

More info and details please my articles here

FAA Drone Testing Concerns-Poor Simulation, Self-Certifying, No Prop Guards and 3DR leadership?


Urban Air Mobility — Four Paths to Disaster


Silicon Valley and Agile are Ruining Engineering


FAA making a grave error in granting autonomous drone waivers to develop in the public domain


The Autonomous Vehicle Industry can be Saved by doing the Opposite of what is being done now


SAE Autonomous Vehicle Engineering Magazine — Simulation’s Next Generation


My name is Michael DeKort — I am a former system engineer, engineering, and program manager for Lockheed Martin. I worked in aircraft simulation, the software engineering manager for all of NORAD, the Aegis Weapon System, and on C4ISR for DHS.

Industry Participation

- Founder SAE On-Road Autonomous Driving Simulation Task Force

- Member SAE ORAD Verification and Validation Task Force

- Stakeholder USDOT VOICES (Virtual Open Innovation Collaborative Environment for Safety)

- Member SAE G-34 / EUROCAE WG-114 Artificial Intelligence in Aviation

- Stakeholder for UL4600 — Creating AV Safety Guidelines

- Member of the IEEE Artificial Intelligence & Autonomous Systems Policy Committee

- Presented the IEEE Barus Ethics Award for Post 9/11 DoD/DHS Whistleblowing Efforts

Systems Engineer, Engineering/Program Management -- DoD/Aerospace/IT - Autonomous Systems Air & Ground, FAA Simulation, UAM, V2X, C4ISR, Cybersecurity