UAS News Podcast — 2013-01-09
Transcript
Alright, hello and welcome to episode number 34 of the UAS News Podcast Series where we interview SMEs from the Global Unmanned Technologies Community. I'm your program host Patrick Egan. Let's say a big hello as always to our co-host Gene Robinson. Hello out there, how are you doing Patrick?
I'm doing good Gene. Everything's good here in sunny California. You know, can't complain and I could but no one had listened anyway. Anyway, this week's episode number 34 Global UAS Initiatives.
We're going to cover a lot of history and information about the current state of the global airspace integration effort. But before we bring our guest on, this is Mr. Doug Davis. I want to ask Gene as usual, anything catch your eye this week in the news Gene?
Oh, I thought it was very interesting with the fiscal curve that we ran into and tripped over that there are still quite a few contracts led or the Pentagon actually left 248 million to the big five out there of Lockheed Martin Air Environment and a few chosen others. I thought that was pretty interesting. Yeah, it seems to show that there's still going to be money for the small unmanned aircraft industry and it's just not going to go away. I would concur with that.
I think that unmanned is the future here to stay and we're going to spend money on those projects. So that was an interesting story. I agree with that. There's some other stuff coming up or that's on the web page that's pretty interesting.
It's worth checking out. But I think what we'll do now is we're going to bring on this week's guest. He's a real heavy hitter when it comes to airspace integration, Mr. Doug Davis.
Hi guys. Thanks for having me on. Hey, Doug. Thanks for coming on.
We got a lot of stuff to cover and so let's get rolling here. I'm going to give a little background. I know you for a while now, Doug, me and Gene. We actually met when you were the head of the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office over there for the FAA and we've known you for a while now.
I was wondering, Doug, if you could give the listeners kind of an overview of your professional career, where you're at now and I guess a cliff note to how you got there. Yeah, I'd be happy to, Pat. I started my aviation career in 1984 when I became an air traffic controller for the FAA. I stayed in the air traffic field environment for about 10, 12 years or so before going to headquarters in 97 where I, at least for the first time, where
I got into satellite navigation as an air traffic requirements lead and moved through some of the upper echelons there, became an airspace manager and then on 9-11 I was the technical advisor to the associate administrator for air traffic at the time whenever 9-11 happened and then about two weeks later I found myself in Colorado Springs as the FAA representative to NORAD where I spent about three years there rewriting the airspace shutdown plans
and emergency procedures, those kinds of things for the airspace system and then moved back to DC.
Thought I needed more pain and headache and before I moved back as an assistant manager in airworthiness and avionics certification where in the end of 2004 I became the aircraft certification lead for unmanned aircraft. The office hadn't been stood up yet. Early the next year, January of 2005, Nick Sabatini decided that he wanted to create the program office and asked me to lead it and which I readily accepted and then I ran that until 2009 when I decided about halfway through 2009 that I've had all the fun with the FAA that I can stand.
I resigned after 25 years and did a short stint at Raytheon for about six months and then I ended up here at New Mexico State University where I'm the director for global UAS strategic initiatives. That's a very interesting career that you've had Doug and like I said I met you while you were working at the FAA and I know that you know we had a couple of heated discussions while you were over there.
You know I know that you're out in the outside. Do you have any perspective you'd like to share about being like somebody who is a proponent for let's say unmanned aircraft systems airspace integration?
Well I think the thing I'd like to share and it's probably not good news especially with some of the content that you and I used to have it does have an apparent feel and that the system is broke a little bit and we'll talk about that more a little bit later on when we talk about what some of the international community is doing versus what we're doing here in the U.S. and how things are broken and it's not necessarily the FAA's fault or anybody else's fault. It just is what it is
and we need to work through those kinds of things so that we can take advantage of new technologies like this without having to wait 20 years.
I agree and I think that'll be pretty interesting but first you know in the first segment here you know I wanted to kind of talk about the New Mexico State University physical science lab. You know I was down there for NIE in October of 11 I think and I got the nickel tour and I was pretty impressed. You know you guys have a beautiful facility some nice aircraft and even lovelier airspace nestled behind the Oregon Mountains there in New Mexico. Maybe you could tell the listeners a little about your position and what you do there and what the NMSU PSL does.
Yeah sure be happy to. So we'll start with what PSL does. The physical science lab was created in 1946 to assist the army over in what was then called the White Sands Proving Ground in the examination of the V2 rocket technology after World War II. We were asked by the army to create a lab to help them do that and we began in 46 and some of the things that PSL has been doing since 1946 are rocket launches and rocket technology so that's an important part of what we do.
The other part some of the other things we are currently the government-owned contractor operated as you know Pat contractor for NASA for the Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility. We have been for I think around 20 years. The location for that facility is actually in Palestine, Texas and at that location we have many facilities around the world that we operate on behalf of NASA customer and we typically will have two to three campaigns per year where we're flying for 60 to 90 days at a time in either Antarctica or off of Sweden and other lovely spots like that.
We fly balloons up to 130,000 feet where they stay aloft for about 30 days at times. We fly balloons that are the size of the Houston Astrodome and we do that around the world like I said on behalf of NASA. Then coming down to earth a little bit one of the things we do at the physical science lab are unmanned aircraft and we've had a program at PSL now for about 13 or 15 years. We have about as you saw Pat we have about a dozen airplanes or so ranging from the Aerostar A's and B's all the way down to the Arian Scout and we fly on a routine basis.
From that perspective how I tie into it, my focus by and large since I've been at PSL which is a little over three years now is aerospace integration both domestically and internationally. With my background I feel like I'm very well suited to get into the fray and try to push things along and that's what my goal at PSL is to make progress in spite of the things that are in front of us. We take whatever progress we can get and we move forward with it and that's my goal at PSL. That's pretty interesting it's almost like an airspace integration cat herder.
It can be that it absolutely can. I know sometimes you know you want to well personally speak for myself I want to throw my hands up but you know I have to hand it to you. You've been sticking with it. Now I did do a story when I did come and do the tour.
I did a story for SUS News about the facility and I took some pictures and a great facility you guys have and I would urge the listeners you can search for that at the susnews.com website and there's some pictures and some commentary about the facility. It's pretty nice. I will say that Las Cruces is like Shangri-La compared to Alamogordo. I'm usually at Alamogordo when I'm doing the NIE.
Not that Alamogordo is not a great town but just we'll just leave it at that. Anyway let's talk you know you sent me over your pdf the presentation from this year's TAC conference which I've never made one of the conferences because I seem to always be there at White Sands and leave two weeks before the conference. It's like you know you leave don't want to come back and one other note that Launch Complex 33 which I'm sure you've been out there for the V2 launch site. Man
I was all over that one last time I was out there was great thing but let's talk about your presentation at the TAC conference this year.
Maybe you can discuss for the audience benefit what is TAC? Yeah I'd be happy to and I neglected to mention the Flight Test Center in New Mexico State PSL. I'll talk about that in a minute. The TAC stands for the Technical Analysis and Application Center.
It was created about 12 or 13 years ago as a research facility within PSL. It still exists. I'm the Deputy Director for TAC. The director is Steve Hotman my boss but through that venue we've been holding a conference every year and this year this past December was our 13th conference 13th annual conference and we are we are pleased that it is so well received.
We are still getting on the neighborhood of 400 to 500 attendees and for a conference like ours where we really try to hit hard the integration issues we're single track so we're not we're not trying to get mass numbers we're trying to really push the quality of what we're accomplishing there. We've got some great sponsorships like Dyke Weatherington within the DOD that really helps us to be able to attract some quality speakers as well.
And then just before I get into my presentation the Flight Test Center at PSL when I was with the FAA I was getting a lot of pressure to create company test ranges and that's still what the companies would like to have at the end of the day but I don't believe they'll ever be able to get those.
And so it was clear that there needed to be a location where we could have some unmanned aircraft experimental testing going on outside of government ranges where a private company Joe's garage could go and fly his unmanned aircraft in an environment that would be low risk and you can't pick a better spot in my opinion than southern New Mexico in particular in that area. As you can attest to both you and Gene can attest to there's about one person for every 20 square miles in that part of the country.
What's that? Why somebody moved in huh?
Since the range is on the west side of White Sands and that restricted area yeah we call it a shadow that White Sands casts over the airspace that we use and it allows us to operate in airspace that is typically low traffic density as well as low population density. Good flying year-round that kind of thing. So the presentation that I give I felt very convicted that you know I think we still have a lot of misconceptions around there about who's doing what, who's really flying, who's really making money commercially, who's not around the world
and I tried to make the first step toward describing what that might look like in that presentation which I sent to you Pat.
So I queried about 20 of my colleagues around the world. I got good responses from about seven or eight of them. The others are not off the hook yet. I'm still going to continue to build this but found out some interesting data.
How much of that Pat do you want to talk about? Well I do want to talk about that and you know one other thing I wanted to go back with on the test center thing though real quick is maybe you know you can you talked about you know where private companies could come out and fly their aircraft which I think is a great idea because there's really no place to come out and test or do anything if you're not a DOD type contractor and at one of the military sites. Maybe you know say you can talk to a scenario like I'm Joe Bagadonis and I want to bring my aircraft out there and test it.
You know what are my benefits and kind of what's required in Cliff Notes? I mean I don't expect you to go into big detail but kind of what it would take for me to come do that and what the benefit for me would be. Could you address that real quick?
Yep you bet. So today as you all know in the U.S. you have one of two ways that you can fly your unmanned aircraft. You can either apply for and receive a certificate of authorization or waiver however you have to be a public aircraft to be able to do that or you can get an experimental airworthiness certificate and that takes a little bit of time and typically it is it's not very nimble in the way that you can make adjustments to your platform those kinds of things that are necessary for an experimental frame.
So the Flight Test Center in southern New Mexico at PSL which is run by Steve Hoffman allows developers let's just say to approach the university and we're a not-for-profit place so it's not like we're trying to make gobs of money off of the business. We don't own the airspace so we don't charge to rent the airspace like DOD ranges do and because we do it in the in the NAS we do it in civil airspace. But what you're paying for in the facts is just for the expertise and then if it goes beyond my site for chase aircraft those kinds of things.
So they will approach PSL they'll give us some information about the aircraft technical qualifications that kind of thing. We'll do a quick review of it and then decide a time frame schedule. Give the customer a rough order magnitude cost of what it will take to get the system through to ability to be able to fly and do the testing. Then we have to do a safety risk analysis of the platform where it's going to fly under what conditions it's going to fly the maturity of the platform itself and depending on the complexity of the system it could take as little as 30 days to complete all this.
It could take as much as a few months to get through again depending on the complexity and we've had some shoulder launch aircraft go through. We've also had some aircraft with you know 150 wing span 150 foot wingspan come through with a lot of complexity and we can't talk much about the platforms because that's you know proprietary information. The other benefit for coming to us is that we do have a proprietary ability to be able to protect that kind of information from the manufacturer.
Right and now the takeaway from that is I know you guys have your you know safety risk management criteria.
Is that something that a vendor so you know I could I could go to the FAA after let's say I sold my one of my aircraft to you know whatever ex federal agency and then I would I would take that and say well I went to I went through the riggers down there at the New Mexico State University Physical Science Laboratory and this is the paperwork from that and I went through their progress or program and this is the documentation I have. Is that something that would benefit a manufacturer?
Yeah I think it would now and I think that it would in the context and you always got to keep this in the context of the the approval that you get to fly is always based on the conditions that you're doing it in the location you're doing it at. The approval that you get to fly over desert and cactuses with nobody in the air with you is a different risk manner than when you want to start to take a platform over populated areas in terminal airspace where the airplanes are moving in and out pretty frequently.
That's a different risk structure so the two don't correlate however there you do get some credit I would imagine for saying well at least you've been through the process you know what the process is you know how to manage risk and how to measure risk so now how do we move on from there it's not like you're starting from zero. Well that's good I think that's very enlightening because I've had people ask me
you know they're like what are the benefits of flying down there well you know you go through their process and there's a vetting and things like that but I think that this will that explanation will help to let's say bring that message out to the masses and people have a better understanding of that.
Okay well you know let's talk about the presentation you know and I want to be kind of delicate because I know you're out there globally dealing with a lot of people and you know it talks about the presentation talks about who you asked as far as who's doing commercial operations and there were a bunch of countries here and it looks like eight or nine countries got back to you about some of the commercial operations that they're doing
and I'm going to say from my own experience I was over at UAS 2011 and a lot of the Europeans and I was in on a couple of meetings there with some CAA people and you know it kind of came up the DFAA was kind of saying well we're leading the way and since this is a family show I can't say what these CAA people were asking me about you know what was going on over here but I said you know I don't know because there's it seems to me that there are other countries that are allowing for commercial operations would
you like to speak to that?
Well there's no doubt other countries have figured out how to crack the nut and then I think though and we need to be very very careful about this because I'm not I don't want to break my arm patting myself on the back but we started we started down the small UAS rulemaking process almost immediately after issuing that dreaded federal register notice because we knew we had a problem we knew we had to fix it so a rule to get commercial operations for a small or some segment of UAS within the the NAS has been ongoing for five or six years.
That's important to state because all of the guys that responded back to the the survey that I was proposing only developed their commercial criteria within the last year or two and it was in my opinion based on what I found from them it was all because we were pushing in the U.S. for a commercial rule to get issued. Now I will tell you where we've kind of fallen off the wagon is that our process is killing us here.
I mean we we should have been able to have a rule obviously in much less of a time as you know you were on the small UAS arc I asked you to be on that and you guys delivered that product to me in March of 2009 I think it was.
I have no clue where that is now and today and I hear that it's it's stuck in in offices and stuff outside of the FAA but it's indicative of the problem we have. We need to be able to move quicker and more nimble on and fortunately for them outside of the U.S. some of our European and other Asia Pacific allies have an ability to be able to do that going through an extensive rulemaking process like we have. Right right well I'll ask you know that you did ask me to be on the small UAS arc any regrets?
No of course not. You always add a little and a little bit of avocado to whatever it is we're asking about. Yeah there was I remember I think the last the last face-to-face that we had in that I I think I said you know I got tired of hearing my own voice and went and sat down and I think that I put poor Bruce Tarbert through the wringer on that on that whole process but you know I felt I had a lot to add on that and hopefully you know what what comes out of that work will be something that we can we can be used or be happy with.
I hope so too we need it. Yeah we do. I really wish we could have come up with something you know for the say under four pound frangible yada yada. We had a lot of different people in that room people didn't really understand the technology but that's a show for another time.
I want to kind of stay on track with your presentation. Now one other question I had with the presentation because we're kind of referencing this and we're yet to have a web page for the podcast and we need to do that but sir anywhere that like a web address where people can see this presentation Doug?
Well the way that we handle TAC presentations obviously and this kind of gets into the business of running conferences is that we typically don't offer the presentations to people that don't attend the conference for obvious reasons but having provided it to you Patrick I don't have a problem if you want to post it it's in the public I'll let you do that if you desire. Well maybe I'll do that on the SUS news web page
and the only reason is I think you know we're speaking about it today and I think it would really give people kind of insight into what you're talking about one but also what happens at TAC and you know kind of backtracking a little bit to the TAC thing you know I haven't attended myself but the the roster of speakers are definitely top tier and it's a very focused conference and I you know I know
you kind of talked about that that you were a one track and some some people may not understand that but your conference is definitely something where you have top tier people come in talking about kind of filtering and distilling down what they're talking about a very relevant conference how many how many days is TAC?
It's only it's three days the the two days are open to anybody the third day is a classified day that we hold off site over at Kirkland Air Force Base and so it usually it's a full week because we'll usually start Monday afternoon Monday evening with a reception and then because we are not necessarily a government sponsored conference we can do a lot of things that some folks can't do for instance this is our fourth or fifth year at the Tamaya Resort which is run by Hyatt it's about 15-20 minutes north of Albuquerque
but you drive there but you park your car and you stay there for the three or four days it's a wonderful resort but the important thing is it's a captive audience so if you are in business and you're trying to network and create a network we we supply all three meals every day and it's an opportunity if you can't network here you got bigger problems you know we have four or five hundred rooms set aside there are other conference rooms set aside we have an extreme ability that I've never seen at any of the conference because again people can't go anywhere
you eat every meal together you have drinks together in the bar afterwards it is it's just it's an environment like no others and and we hear repeatedly that if you only had one unmanned aircraft conference to go to in a year you go to TAC and and having been a part of it for about eight or nine years I believe that I agree with that assessment well I will say you know for the benefit of the audience
you know again a lot of people that are probably you know may not really know about your show the smaller more focused shows are definitely like what you're talking about they're being able to network and whatever else these types of shows these smaller shows are where you're going to get to sidebar with people that you probably wouldn't have access to in the in the everyday environment these people are very busy there's an opportunity to to catch them pull them over talk to them candidly
you know one-on-one and that's kind of the thing I like about the smaller shows I really got to make your show I was going to thinking about it this year but you know after a couple of months in the desert I'm ready to get out of the desert but I think I'm going to have to try and make that and and you know I would suggest that other people make that show too and it's always at the same time when when is it could
you put that out there for the for the listeners and then maybe the website yeah it is typically the the first week in December this this coming year let me pull it up real quick it's going to be December 3rd through the 5th of this coming year and the the website is just www.nmsu.psl.tac and I think it'll come up there yeah well it's definitely something people should put on their calendar if you
you know you want to be in this business that's for sure I would suggest going now you can't go to the last day right the last day is the military and you have to have a clearance and all the rest of that correct that's right it's a classified day excuse me and it really is a very informative day as you can imagine being part of things anytime that they can talk about the classified things that are being done with this technology it is amazing to have that understanding
right now I am you know moving on from that I do need to catch that I need to I'd like to catch all three days since I have a clearance I could maybe get to how do you get to the third day you have to have more than a clearance you have to be invited to the third day or no it's just like the first two you you can sign up and register the only thing different with the third day is that you have to be sending your clearance information
okay all right and this is your clearance as old as needed all right well you know I'm going for the upgrade but uh that sounds good to know all right um so you know back to the presentation and you were saying you know some of the other countries and I know you're doing some uh you're doing some work with uh IKO too correct that's right so I uh I represent uh a new mexico state university physical
science lab we decided strategically that we needed to to as a part of this whole airspace integration that that we needed to be in a position to be able to influence what happens with the air traffic management system that currently globally is primarily being handled uh through an organization called the civil air navigation service organization or canso and canso represents 85 percent of the world's air navigation service providers
so that's all your air traffic control facilities and organizations around the world 85 percent of them and and uh that's important because they have a permanent residence up at the IKO headquarters in montreal and it's and it's important because they have a significant voice uh with that so I um I am the canso representative to the IKO UAS study group now UAS study group about four or five years ago when it started
I was the co-chair along with the Holger Matieson who was in with ural control and uh and both of us moved on and now the chairman uh co-chairs actually are jim coin from australia and uh felipo tomasello from uh he's actually italian but he represents the european aviation safety agency in cologne germany uh and we're getting ready to go and uh take our uh our sun guard with us up to montreal here in about two weeks for a week-long meeting uh which should be lovely at this time of year bring your muck lux
you know now the one other thing I you know wanted to talk about so you know you were saying that these european countries are at all we're looking at the work that we were doing here in the uh the U.S.
and they were saying oh you know we better kind of keep cracking on this deal and so in my estimation personally I would say okay well the europeans are kind of leading the way now with the small stuff and and they're working that and so they were trying to play catch-up would you think that kind of the the worm has turned possibly where uh the the faa and this is just an opinion is kind of looking at the work they're doing
and saying uh oh we got to kind of catch up with that or are they just mired down in the process you know it depends on how you want to look at the market if you once you post my briefing pad if you turn to the last slide which is the conclusion slide and again these are my conclusions based on the other survey but but you'll see in there the third board says that a very important thing and that is a risk-based approach for allowing small u.a.s access has proven success in europe
and elsewhere so and that's an important thing to point out because uh what we don't need is a tendency to force something that weighs four pounds to go through a traditional airworthiness process it needs to go through a risk-based assessment but i don't think it needs to have airworthiness as we know airworthiness for a triple seven or seven eight seven the other thing is the next bullet and this is where
i think it's very telling very little if any activity or demand for platforms above 25 kilos i mean that tells me that yeah i think they're very comfortable outside the u.s with going with small u.a.s platforms and that could be seven kilos and under the uk has a very good rule called cap 722 that they've been applying this process for years lots of great experience but if you're under seven kilo
you know you could you can do some good commercial work over there right now but even the the bits will tell you there's no demand above that and so it depends on how you want to say look i um my perspective is it'll be another year or two before we we see a commercial application rule come out in the u.s at which point in time we'll see the market really kick it in the pants but as far as the the stuff that really has more risk the stuff above 25 kilos we still are the only place that gets it done in the world
right well jean beyond the cup you know like israel that kind of thing well i'd like to let jean jump in here uh jean you have anything you'd like to add sir yeah i i got to concur with you doug i think that seven kilos 15 to 20 pounds uh most commercial operators that we've spoken to in the past don't see them you know they don't see themselves exceeding that for a vast majority of the applications that they want even industrial applications for sniffers
and mass spec and stuff like that so that's why we've always been trying to push as hard as we could to get that smaller lower weight class uh in into the spotlight rather than going above the 55 pound limit or the you know the 25 kilo limit so you know it would be interesting to see the the the push move toward that but it really hasn't it's kind of been stuck toward the the large end of the of the spectrum do
you agree or disagree with that well i think i think that the issue is where the money is um sure there you go i think the money is is all pointed toward the bigger platforms um and and i think that that makes a lot of sense but but the volume and then in terms of the numbers of unmanned aircraft that are going to be built i still agree with the teal report that it shows thousands and thousands of small u.a.s um will probably be in the marketplace long before
you know a commercial global hawk will be around at any one time yeah i i have to agree with that i mean you know even for the smaller operator you know when you get into heavier platforms you get into more complexity you get into redundant systems and that starts to let's say that the cost versus value starts to fall off and i really believe that even uh you know as jean was saying with his weight limit that probably 90 to 95 percent in the future will be under that that's my personal thing
i also want to say that i kind of agree with what you had to say doug about the commercial rule and i don't want to be a debbie downer but i i have a feeling that this uh the congressional mandate 2015 thing is probably in my mind realistic to see the small thing can disagree yeah well i think the integration and the success of integration is going to be in the eye of the beholder if those of us that are in the community if we think that there's any hope of full u.a.s file
and fly integration by 2016 right that's not going to happen this probably is not going to happen by 2020 either for that matter and then technology is the problem but but i i agree i think as far as a 2015 congressional mandate or direction they by the way a unfunded mandate to the fa yeah i i think if we get a small rule done not just out for comment but actually finalize rule and and a couple other things that
i think can be done then then i think that that would be success by 2015 i would concur with that and then you know you kind of touched on the the congressional mandate and the unfunded which is you know i mean to me it's it's a little ludicrous but also you know the proposed language that was put into the bill and sent out there and the congress put out those mandates did did you see that language
and do you have any comments on that doug yeah well you know i i watched the language evolve over the past five years um because some of that stuff took took that long it didn't make it after one fa reauthorization after another it just it just was ludicrous to watch the evolution of it but and you can always tell when when people don't know what they're talking about when they butcher the acronyms
right and kind of keep calling them unmanned aerial systems and all the things that happen you know you're in for trouble whenever the person writing that specific guidance really doesn't understand the technology that they're writing about so you know from my perspective having been in dc worked in dc for a dozen years or so i don't get too excited about congressional direction and guidance and frankly being a program manager in dc is probably the worst job in the world because
you never know year to year what your budget is going to be and mercy sakes if you've got congressional work to do you know you're tied up it's like the job that never goes anywhere you know it's funny we could probably do a whole show you know program manager from dc the trials and tribulations of that job that must be a very daunting task and i'm sure that it takes a somebody who's very deft at
you know walking the line being very political and knowing how to to to handle all types of people yeah well and that's very true and you have to understand your listeners need to understand that the faa does not lobby congress is not allowed to lobby congress dod can with the way that the us code is written the faa cannot right and and i'm sure you know i mean uh i i try and say you know we want to work with the faa
and everything else and i know that they they have certain constraints that they have to work through and i don't think that a lot of people understand that that are in the effort i mean the conversation let's say uh and from the community is still one well why don't they just do this you know well you know i wish it was that easy it's just not i know it's not and i've you know even that to be fair i've offered that to have the the new head of the unmanned aircraft systems integration office come on the podcast
and you know maybe talk to the communities he's declined but um you know maybe in the future it would be nice if we could get more of a two-way street going but i know they have constraints that they're they're working under and i think that our conversation today you've pretty much helped you know bring some of those ideas to the forefront and people can understand them i want to give jean one more chance we're down under a minute here
but jean did you have anything else you'd like to ask or add sir no no no i think uh i think doug has pretty much covered all the bases that we set out to talk about i've been uh been listening with quite a lot of interest i think that doug is great background have been a great guest for us absolutely i concur with that doug i want to thank you for uh coming on and being a guest i'm glad you came here
i think you brought a lot to the table as always sir you bring a lot to the table always have and i think you always will um and if there's anything we can do in the future over at susnews.com to help you with your work sir please let us know and we're happy to try and move the ball forward all right my pleasure pat and jean thanks for having me and i think um maybe we can work on getting you a press pass attack next year thank
you sir i'd be interested in doing that all right all right bye bye until next week everyone uh you know um have a good week okay see you