Emergency Declarartion Triggers FAA Fishing Expedition

Jay,

You (and really, all of us) could benefit by reading this article. Yes, the entire thing.

http://www.avweb.com/news/pilotlounge/182061-1.html?redirected=1


Good story.

But I still wouldn't roll the trucks for a genny out unless something else was going on. :rolleyes2:

I've had it happen twice in VFR and I just landed like I was nobody special. The last time, I was an hour out, on flight following, and the genny died. I turned everything off that I could and left the 430 on. After notifying FF that I was turning around and that I could be NORDO at some point going back home, I stayed on FF and never declared, and center never asked, but I would have said no. I told him I would try to maintain my current direct to heading and altitude back home in case I go Nordo. And that I would call in from ground later if that happened. The batt lasted an hour and I never lost comm. I canceled FF into VFR back home with radio and everything. It was just the generator.

If I had lost radio, center could have vectored anyone they control around me and set me up for a decent entry at least.. :dunno:
 
Jay,

You (and really, all of us) could benefit by reading this article. Yes, the entire thing.

http://www.avweb.com/news/pilotlounge/182061-1.html?redirected=1
I always enjoy Rick's articles, and remember when I first read this one, because he stayed at our hotel in Iowa not long after it was published.

But what in the world has it got to do with something as trivial as a lost alternator? You simply can't equate a strong fuel odor in the cockpit with your voltmeter dropping from 13.2 to 12.5 volts in VFR flight.

One could be truly deadly. The other is an expensive* aggravation that can be resolved after you land.

* - Although it's not always expensive. Twice in Pipers it turned out to be a loose wire on the back of the alternator. Tighten 'er up and you're good to go for another year or three.
 
It was a statement of fact.

Inane : adjective silly

Diatribe: noun: diatribe; a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something.

So in my opinion your rant (diatribe) against the FAA was silly (inane).

I simply posted an emoticon after your post and your response is a long winded diatribe, so I responded.

G'night Nate.


It wasn't bitter. Government bureaucracy ineffectiveness and waste is a fact of life in modern America. Doesn't change the fact that it exists. If simply stating it, is "forceful", LOL. That's funny.

Six to ten sentences is only "long winded" online. I suspect it's because people aren't interested in real discussions, just sound bites and snark, most of the time.

I type around 90 WPM at a keyboard and more than half that on a touchscreen. What I type is what I would say in an in person conversation. I'll make an assertion and back it up with multiple examples.

But you've sneakily changed the topic and avoided the question I posed. I'm still waiting to see if the person who blamed FAAs problems on "diversity" to respond. That's hilarious. (But I have not caught up on the whole thread yet...)
 
So caught up and no answer. LOL. I certainly know there's some "diversity" involved but in the case of calling a lost alternator an emergency or not being able to put out a simple document for all FSDOs to follow on simple stuff like hanging a camera on an airplane, it's utterly ridiculous as an excuse. No doubt.
 
I always enjoy Rick's articles, and remember when I first read this one, because he stayed at our hotel in Iowa not long after it was published.

But what in the world has it got to do with something as trivial as a lost alternator? You simply can't equate a strong fuel odor in the cockpit with your voltmeter dropping from 13.2 to 12.5 volts in VFR flight.

One could be truly deadly. The other is an expensive* aggravation that can be resolved after you land.

Read it again. The fuel smell in the cockpit one was obvious. The other one (the Aztec), not so much.

I guess the point is that you don't know what it is in flight. Did your voltage drop to 12.5 because your alternator went out, or did it drop to 12.5 because the drive gear broke and is throwing metal around inside your engine, or did it drop to 12.5 because a wire came loose somewhere and is now hanging against a fuel line and sparking?
 
So caught up and no answer. LOL. I certainly know there's some "diversity" involved but in the case of calling a lost alternator an emergency or not being able to put out a simple document for all FSDOs to follow on simple stuff like hanging a camera on an airplane, it's utterly ridiculous as an excuse. No doubt.

Relax. I haven't had time to address your concerns about my "diverse" comment because I was working aircraft accidents over the past few days. My priority was those accidents, not addressing your picking of the word 'diverse' from my post and making it into some sort of massive excuse for how the FAA conducts business.

My point wasn't that your aircraft or pilot certificate were diverse depending on where you lived. My point was that in Juneau, Alaska, they will handle things differently than in Des Moines, Iowa. They have to. The country is different...in geography and demographics.

You SHOULD NOT get 11 different answers from 10 different FSDOs when you ask about mounting a GoPro camera on your aircraft. But it wouldn't surprise me if you did. Have you ever read FAA Order 8900? It's the guidance given to Inspectors on how to do our job. It's not a precise, black and white document. I believe purposefully so. It allows for Inspectors to handle each situation on its merits. This is one reason why people receive different answers.

I am not ignorant that different FSDOs do things differently. Neither is the FAA. But it's not as easy of a fix as we'd all like to believe, to instantly eliminate personalities, cultures, etc. to make us all robots so we can give the same answer every time. It'd be great if we could provide the same answer no matter which FSDO you contacted, but that's not reality...for a variety of reasons.

You seem very angry. I hope everything is OK.
 
I lived in Arkansas at the time and learned the hard way to not have any mods done to it in Missouri. The LIT FSDO was far easier to work with in getting field approvals than the KC FSDO was. It was like they were from separate planets.

This doesn't surprise me. It shouldn't be that way, but I know it can be. Inspectors have different (or "diverse") personalities and, like it or not, those personalities dictate, in part, how things can be handled. But it's not just the Inspector's personalities...offices can also have their own personalities as well.

I'm not trying to justify anything, just providing some reasons why this happens. As pilots, we have these same issues. Ever flown with another pilot who chose to operate an aircraft in a significantly different manner than you would have? How about flying with a Captain who's personality was harsh and not polite? Both of these situations will alter how a particular flight was conducted. But, it doesn't necessarily mean the flight wasn't flown safely.
 
Re: Emergency Declaration Triggers FAA Fishing Expedition

...I am not ignorant that different FSDOs do things differently. Neither is the FAA. But it's not as easy of a fix as we'd all like to believe, to instantly eliminate personalities, cultures, etc. to make us all robots so we can give the same answer every time. It'd be great if we could provide the same answer no matter which FSDO you contacted, but that's not reality...for a variety of reasons...

Personally, I would have to admit that insisting that FSDO policies be uniform to the point of rigidity could have many undesirable effects.
 
Last edited:
It was a statement of fact.

Inane : adjective silly

Diatribe: noun: diatribe; a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something.

So in my opinion your rant (diatribe) against the FAA was silly (inane).

so are you claiming 'fact' or 'opinion'? Your post is conflicted.
 
Government service is most often a massive waste of talent, you probably included, from what I've read. You're back to flying an airplane instead of an iPad. I think that's very cool.

You shouldn't feel any compulsion to defend silly statements like the "diversity" one anymore, though. They weren't even your words.

He can answer. He's a big boy. ;)

Not sure why you have chosen to insult me by calling my job a "massive waste of talent" and taking a cheap shot by calling me a "big boy".

You may not have liked my answer, but from where I sit, it's an (unfortunate) reality. I'm not saying it's fair or right. Just my perspective. In the future, please realize that it may be a few days before I can respond and that my lack of a response is in no way meant to ignore your question.

I left another message board and tried this one based on a recommendation. The other message board was full of people "discussing" topics in the manner in which I quoted you above, so I left. It's too bad, that in the short time I've been on here, you proved that this board has the same problems.
 
Personally, I would have to admit that insisting that FSDO policies be uniform to the point of rigidity could have many undesirable effects.

Which is why I believe our guidance is written with "wiggle room" for Inspectors. Now, if an Inspector is being harsh, just because they woke up on the wrong side of the bed, that's wrong.
 
I left another message board and tried this one based on a recommendation. The other message board was full of people "discussing" topics in the manner in which I quoted you above, so I left. It's too bad, that in the short time I've been on here, you proved that this board has the same problems.

We used to be a lot better. :(

I kinda think more of us need to get to the PoA fly-ins like Gaston's and the FlyBQ. When more of us knew each other in person, this was a much friendlier place.

I actually wouldn't mind a bit more moderation, even. Way too many personal attacks going on.
 
Re: Emergency Declaration Triggers FAA Fishing Expedition

I left another message board and tried this one based on a recommendation. The other message board was full of people "discussing" topics in the manner in which I quoted you above, so I left. It's too bad, that in the short time I've been on here, you proved that this board has the same problems.

As long as I stay out of The Spin Zone (politics and religion section), I find that this board is tolerable. However, if you get fed up with us, you might try Avsig (also linked in post #1). Message traffic is a lot lower, but the average level of civility is better than I have experienced on any other forum.
 
Last edited:
We used to be a lot better. :(

I kinda think more of us need to get to the PoA fly-ins like Gaston's and the FlyBQ. When more of us knew each other in person, this was a much friendlier place.

I actually wouldn't mind a bit more moderation, even. Way too many personal attacks going on.

Did you just sign up for a moderator's job? :rofl:

Wait a minute, you haven't even made it to the last couple 6Y9ers...
 
Relax. I haven't had time to address your concerns about my "diverse" comment because I was working aircraft accidents over the past few days. My priority was those accidents, not addressing your picking of the word 'diverse' from my post and making it into some sort of massive excuse for how the FAA conducts business.



My point wasn't that your aircraft or pilot certificate were diverse depending on where you lived. My point was that in Juneau, Alaska, they will handle things differently than in Des Moines, Iowa. They have to. The country is different...in geography and demographics.



You SHOULD NOT get 11 different answers from 10 different FSDOs when you ask about mounting a GoPro camera on your aircraft. But it wouldn't surprise me if you did. Have you ever read FAA Order 8900? It's the guidance given to Inspectors on how to do our job. It's not a precise, black and white document. I believe purposefully so. It allows for Inspectors to handle each situation on its merits. This is one reason why people receive different answers.



I am not ignorant that different FSDOs do things differently. Neither is the FAA. But it's not as easy of a fix as we'd all like to believe, to instantly eliminate personalities, cultures, etc. to make us all robots so we can give the same answer every time. It'd be great if we could provide the same answer no matter which FSDO you contacted, but that's not reality...for a variety of reasons.



You seem very angry. I hope everything is OK.


Not angry. But that's a lame attempt at emotional cover. (Fairly common these days. Even if I were angry, so what? I pay for the poor "service". It's inappropriate for an employee to demand the boss not be upset at poor performance, but government worship and the resulting attitude of "it's ok, they're just incompetent" is rampant in our society's attitude these days.)

The nature of large bureaucracy is to declare mediocrity "good enough" and to keep going.

I didn't "pick" the word. You did. I see you've back pedaled into "a variety of reasons" now instead.

Think any of my customers might be bothered if I said my business was jacked up for "a variety of reasons" for decades on end?

Oh right. They'd find a different vendor.

Guess I don't have that option so... I suppose I should just accept it?

Or, since you're operating on borrowed money and not what I'm paying anyway (no such thing as a balanced Federal budget... man I want that deal for my business!), is the whole point of me having to pay as much as I do, part of the way to make me have skin in the game so I say, "wow, that sucks"? Loudly?

I fought pretty hard to make sure FAA got out from being funded by CR. Quite a bit of effort. The bad assumption was that a real budget would help clean up some of those "variety" of reasons and move priorities back to customer service instead of infighting. It guess it didn't, and was a mistake on my part.

Best possible outcome now is to let it expire and squeeze the budget again. Leadership and priorities seem to only come out during times when the resources are way too tight to mess around. Not even sure that's true, when the head guy is (was) a drunk.

Thanks for doing what you do, but the problems are way above your level and systemic.

No other government organization that writes regulations says, "We don't know what we meant to write into our rulebook, no one is using a consistent rulebook continuously updated as things change, nor can we change it to match what we intended. Write our lawyer and they'll take care of it with an opinion letter that carries the weight of law."

LOL. Sad. I have to get up in the morning and do what customers want and respond to their questions in a timely manner. If the question is going to come up again, I document and share the answer across colleagues immediately. No point in wasting resources and people's time researching it 20 times.

And the camera question just being one of many as just an example of how that is not the FAA's internal attitude. I specifically provided it because that's one that is no different in Juneau than in San Diego. And there's plenty more like that.

Why invest in an organization that takes no interest in efficiency? Out here where there's a budget, we'd be dead and gone in a year.
 
Not sure why you have chosen to insult me by calling my job a "massive waste of talent" and taking a cheap shot by calling me a "big boy".



You may not have liked my answer, but from where I sit, it's an (unfortunate) reality. I'm not saying it's fair or right. Just my perspective. In the future, please realize that it may be a few days before I can respond and that my lack of a response is in no way meant to ignore your question.



I left another message board and tried this one based on a recommendation. The other message board was full of people "discussing" topics in the manner in which I quoted you above, so I left. It's too bad, that in the short time I've been on here, you proved that this board has the same problems.


There is a long history of R&W jumping on anything that even sniffs of negative waves toward FAA and dropping personal insults. I was replying to him, not you.

As far as "big boy" goes, no intent at insult to you was intended. Pay attention to whom I was talking to.

I also was not impatient for your response. Again, pay attention to whom the message was in reply to.

I can't guarantee that you'll find me all twitterpated and happy about government or the services it provides at the cost of roughly 1/2 of my earnings, however.

While you're obviously not personally responsible, neither is the $7/hr bank employee I spoke with at a bank I was leaving for poor service either. Guess who got to hear why, and who had to write it down in hopes they didn't lose another customer? Such is life... Last I checked, the head of Barclays isn't taking customer calls.

I thought your comment about diversity was silly and a sign that your leadership (if it even exists) over you is poor. Not your fault they can't get their you-know-what together.
 
Did you just sign up for a moderator's job? :rofl:

:hairraise:

I would, if I had the time... Well, maybe not. I like to get into heated discussions sometimes, not something that's good for a mod. I think Mari is amazing, she gets into the middle of heated discussions without ever adding any heat to them, and makes a lot of good points. Wish I had that ability!

Wait a minute, you haven't even made it to the last couple 6Y9ers...

I should be there this year, though I might have to fly over to MSN and grab the 182RG depending on how long the runway is gonna be this year.
 
There is a long history of R&W jumping on anything that even sniffs of negative waves toward FAA and dropping personal insults. I was replying to him, not you.

As far as "big boy" goes, no intent at insult to you was intended. Pay attention to whom I was talking to.

I also was not impatient for your response. Again, pay attention to whom the message was in reply to.

I can't guarantee that you'll find me all twitterpated and happy about government or the services it provides at the cost of roughly 1/2 of my earnings, however.

While you're obviously not personally responsible, neither is the $7/hr bank employee I spoke with at a bank I was leaving for poor service either. Guess who got to hear why, and who had to write it down in hopes they didn't lose another customer? Such is life... Last I checked, the head of Barclays isn't taking customer calls.

I thought your comment about diversity was silly and a sign that your leadership (if it even exists) over you is poor. Not your fault they can't get their you-know-what together.
Good answer, especially the last part.

Everyone got wound up with me last year because I was going to ignore, as much as possible, the Pink Shirts at Oshkosh, due to how the FAA was treating us. The common response here was "It's not their fault, don't be so hard on them. They're just doing their jobs."

To which I say: Horse hockey. When I have a problem with a business, I don't often have the chance to speak with the owner. I -- and everyone else -- am stuck dealing with the poor clerk. It's not fair, but that's life.

Like it or not, controllers are the clerk-level employees at the FAA, we are their bosses AND customers, and they are the people we have to deal with. I understand they don't like to hear bad news, or deal with disgruntled customers, but until we all have the Administrator's cell number, that's how it will be.

Nonetheless, I am glad this FAA dude decided to join the conversation, and hope he sticks around. I, for one, would like to better understand the inner workings of a machine that, from the outside, anyway, appears so dysfunctional.
 
I posted on this thread in an attempt to clear up how emergencies are handled at the FSDO level. I also tried to explain why people see different answers from different FSDOs.

You may not have liked my answers, or perhaps I used the wrong choice of words to explain why those things happen. If I circle back around and try to explain it a different way, I don't consider it "back pedaling", rather trying to clear up what I was trying to say (monumentally difficult on a message board).

Denverpilot obviously has some real angst with the federal government, and that's fine. There are avenues for people like him to voice their concerns/complaints regarding FAA actions. A simple google search will turn up the answers.

I guess I need to accept the fact that some people hate the government/FAA so badly, that nothing I say will make any bit of difference. No matter how many pilots I've gotten out of violations by proving it wasn't their fault. No matter how many thank you cards I have from pilots who I've dealt with that were surprised that "someone like [me]" worked at the FAA. I need to accept that in some people's eyes, I'll always be a big, fat waste of talent.

I was hopeful that this forum would be different, but it's not. I very much enjoy talking with other pilots and offering them one ASI's opinion for reference. I will no longer or checking this thread after tonight.

I will keep my account open this week in case anyone wants to shoot me a question via PM. I'd be happy to get the answers for you. After that, I will delete my account. Good luck to all of you and I wish you safe flying. I also hope that any dealings with the FAA are ultimately positive experiences.

#flysafe
 
I posted on this thread in an attempt to clear up how emergencies are handled at the FSDO level. I also tried to explain why people see different answers from different FSDOs.



You may not have liked my answers, or perhaps I used the wrong choice of words to explain why those things happen. If I circle back around and try to explain it a different way, I don't consider it "back pedaling", rather trying to clear up what I was trying to say (monumentally difficult on a message board).



Denverpilot obviously has some real angst with the federal government, and that's fine. There are avenues for people like him to voice their concerns/complaints regarding FAA actions. A simple google search will turn up the answers.



I guess I need to accept the fact that some people hate the government/FAA so badly, that nothing I say will make any bit of difference. No matter how many pilots I've gotten out of violations by proving it wasn't their fault. No matter how many thank you cards I have from pilots who I've dealt with that were surprised that "someone like [me]" worked at the FAA. I need to accept that in some people's eyes, I'll always be a big, fat waste of talent.



I was hopeful that this forum would be different, but it's not. I very much enjoy talking with other pilots and offering them one ASI's opinion for reference. I will no longer or checking this thread after tonight.



I will keep my account open this week in case anyone wants to shoot me a question via PM. I'd be happy to get the answers for you. After that, I will delete my account. Good luck to all of you and I wish you safe flying. I also hope that any dealings with the FAA are ultimately positive experiences.



#flysafe


You mistake hate for disdain. Hate is reserved for individuals. Disdain is what any very expensive organization that can't answer simple questions consistently, posed by customers, deserves.

You attribute way too much emotion to my emotionless factual statements. I'm not emotional about what amounts to a relatively simple discipline and organizational communication problem, other than it's annoying to pay for it.

I'm sorry if you were expecting roses or a prize or something. What would you have me say? It's okay these things can't seem to ever get fixed?

It's not personal. Not at all. I'd buy ya multiple beers and sit around and shoot the bull for hours. I think the mistake was in trying to explain your employer's structural problems away as being caused by their customers.

I'm game. I'll never complain again if you'll describe how it will get fixed. But realize I have no beef with you personally.

Here's a question. Any inspectors in different areas ever get together informally or via email and decide how they're going to answer questions like the example I posed? I've seen plenty of Sales, Technical, and other lower level staff do that in private industry.

"The cheat sheet for my research into this problem is on the shared file server here... It's been forwarded to management and can be amended at any time but if it saves anyone some time researching and helps us give a better answer for customers asking about this problem, feel free to use it. Make additions/corrections as you see fit."

Happens all the time in my biz. Is there such a thing available between inspectors?
 
This is /was becoming a great discussion until the guy who knows the best answer decides to bail....

A VERY simple question was asked and it is a current, ongoing activity... " Does bolting on a external camera to a certified aircraft draw a penalty from the FAA".

Seeing how MOST regs are strictly enforced with NO wiggle room, I am amazed that there can be so many variables in interpretation throughout the FSDO network...

In the private sector, businesses HAVE to respond to customers with a consistant answer to stay in business... In the public sector they can just say " thats's just the way it is and deal with it"...

After all, I can't recall even ONE FAA inspector getting fired over a bad call.. They have the guvmint work rules that shield them, They have their union rules that basically cover thier asses from ANY problem they create on themselves...

So, when the chips are down and they don't get the response they are expecting..... They take their ball and go home... Ya see... they will get a paycheck next week, and keep their lavish benefits and retirement plan and cruise through life without the risk of getting fired.....

It is a good gig, if you can get it...:yes:......:rolleyes: IMHO...
 
Last edited:
Always remember, the Ruling Class, above all else, protects its own. This applies to the head of the IRS, and extends all the way down to the lowest clerk in the FAA.

It's Priority One.
 
Always remember, the Ruling Class, above all else, protects its own. This applies to the head of the IRS, and extends all the way down to the lowest clerk in the FAA.

It's Priority One.


No.

A factual statement would be, "the lowest clerk of the FAA can and will be held accountable for statements made in a public forum."
 
No.

A factual statement would be, "the lowest clerk of the FAA can and will be held accountable for statements made in a public forum."
Really? Held accountable...how?

My friends who work in government tell me that about the worst thing that can happen to them is that they will be put on paid leave, and sent to counseling. And that's only if they murder someone.
:)
 
Really? Held accountable...how?

My friends who work in government tell me that about the worst thing that can happen to them is that they will be put on paid leave, and sent to counseling. And that's only if they murder someone.
:)


The FAA table of penalties states the first offense penalty for "Making malicious, defamatory and/or irresponsible statements; unauthorized statements to the public" is a reprimand to a 30 day suspension. Anyone who publicly states they are an FAA employee (even/especially on a public Internet forum) assumes accountability for any/all statements made on such a forum.
 
... extends all the way down to the lowest clerk in the FAA.

It's Priority One.

I don't think that's correct. In the government and other large organizations, the clerk is probably going to be fired after an incident that gets publicity, even if he or she was following the direct orders of a higher up.

In the case of the IRS criminal ring, the very explanation was that 'rouge employees' in what was called 'the remote office in Cincinnati' were at fault, and nobody in DC knew anything about the crime ring.

Of course it's clear now that the crime ring was directed at very high levels indeed.
 
The FAA table of penalties states the first offense penalty for "Making malicious, defamatory and/or irresponsible statements; unauthorized statements to the public" is a reprimand to a 30 day suspension. Anyone who publicly states they are an FAA employee (even/especially on a public Internet forum) assumes accountability for any/all statements made on such a forum.

Sure, if they identified themselves BY NAME. Otherwise, nope.
 
Seems more like he was chased off.

If our government employee can be "chased off" by Nate's pointed questions, that's pretty sad. It sure highlights their "circle the wagons, it's us against them" mentality.

I had some back-channel PM talks with our FAA dude, and he seemed like a good chap. His basic problem was that he was internalizing the FAA's systemic problems, and thereby taking Nate's questioning of the FAA's many failures personally.

No one asked him to do that. No one in their right mind should.
 
If our government employee can be "chased off" by Nate's pointed questions, that's pretty sad. It sure highlights their "circle the wagons, it's us against them" mentality.
It's no surprise to me why some people leave. Everyone is here voluntarily and if someone starts an interrogation and others leap in, there is no reason to stay. Not to mention the fact that others don't want to read about it over and over.

So I am going to be +3.
 
What do you guys want, me to give him a participation award like they give in schools now? Yay! You have excuses! Have a trophy!

I called him on an excuse he made for his employer and he bailed. You guys call that an "interrogation"?! ROFLMAO.

I never claimed it was his fault. His employer has awful leadership and terrible internal communication. He could say, "Hey we tried to create documents for our colleagues and they turned us down." Or whatever.

FAA does some things well and does other things incredibly poorly. A consistent message across FSDOs isn't one of the good things.

He made an excuse for it, then decided to "circle back around" to ultimately say (paraphrasing) "it's complicated" and ran off.

If I did that to a customer my **** would be packed and someone would be waiting at my desk to escort me out the door.

I was just the awful terrible *customer* who pointed out that folks have been asking about camera mounts for years. At least those of us who don't feel like playing "gotcha" when the wrong inspector from the wrong FSDO sees it.
 
Nate (and others):

Part of the problem is the way things come across on the internet - or rather any medium where one can't detect the little personal cues (like voice inflection or body language). It's easy to forget that in the heat of a discussion.

Another part of the problem is that most bureaucracies (government AND business) are not exactly designed for customer service. They're designed for administrative efficiency while giving lip service to customer service. Individuals in those bureaucracies may well want to & try to give exceptional service - and sometimes the bureaucracy stops them. That's true of most government agencies, it's true of most big companies. Dealing with the DMV is not a whole lot different than dealing with Comcast or one of the airlines. You may find that most folks will help (or explain how/why things are done), and it's been my experience that a bit of kindness goes a lot further than browbeating. And yes, a lot of folks abuse the customer-facing employees of such bureaucracies.... that impacts everyone.
 
Nate (and others):

Part of the problem is the way things come across on the internet - or rather any medium where one can't detect the little personal cues (like voice inflection or body language). It's easy to forget that in the heat of a discussion.

Another part of the problem is that most bureaucracies (government AND business) are not exactly designed for customer service. They're designed for administrative efficiency while giving lip service to customer service. Individuals in those bureaucracies may well want to & try to give exceptional service - and sometimes the bureaucracy stops them. That's true of most government agencies, it's true of most big companies. Dealing with the DMV is not a whole lot different than dealing with Comcast or one of the airlines. You may find that most folks will help (or explain how/why things are done), and it's been my experience that a bit of kindness goes a lot further than browbeating. And yes, a lot of folks abuse the customer-facing employees of such bureaucracies.... that impacts everyone.

I agree with Bill on his first sentence......


The second part is sad, incorrect and needs to be fixed by the guvmint...

All govenrment agencies are designed to give the employees the easiest job they can cram down the publics throat.... To say they are set up for
administrative efficiency is 100 WRONG.....

They are structured for job protection, employee preservation and getting to retirement with maximum retirement pay.. There is a good reason the guvmint 18 TRILLION dollars in debt.. And it sure ain't from efficiency:no::no:.......

I know Bill is a mod and might sanction me for this post... but the truth is the truth and I can handle his decision..

Now.... It would be nice if the self exiled expert would re- appear and give a logical and honest explaination on why there are obvious differences in opinions of the FSDO's around the country, and more importantly, why a simple directive from the head of the FAA for a difinitive straight answer to a common question.....

Come on guy /gals,, it ain't that hard to fix.....:no:....

Unless this is part of their " administrative efficiency "...:rolleyes:
 
I agree with Bill on his first sentence......


The second part is sad, incorrect and needs to be fixed by the guvmint...

All govenrment agencies are designed to give the employees the easiest job they can cram down the publics throat.... To say they are set up for
administrative efficiency is 100 WRONG.....

They are structured for job protection, employee preservation and getting to retirement with maximum retirement pay.. There is a good reason the guvmint 18 TRILLION dollars in debt.. And it sure ain't from efficiency:no::no:.......

I know Bill is a mod and might sanction me for this post... but the truth is the truth and I can handle his decision..

Now.... It would be nice if the self exiled expert would re- appear and give a logical and honest explaination on why there are obvious differences in opinions of the FSDO's around the country, and more importantly, why a simple directive from the head of the FAA for a difinitive straight answer to a common question.....

Come on guy /gals,, it ain't that hard to fix.....:no:....

Unless this is part of their " administrative efficiency "...:rolleyes:

"Administrative efficiency" is probably more correctly expressed "administrative convenience" - in other words, policies and procedures are established to handle things in a certain fashion, rather than allow flexibility & deviations by those that are regulated and/or those processing said applications. Meaning that they're set up to process in a uniform fashion rather than taking into account differences and deviations that might produce better results in some cases (in theory, speeding the processing).
 
If our government employee can be "chased off" by Nate's pointed questions, that's pretty sad. It sure highlights their "circle the wagons, it's us against them" mentality.

I had some back-channel PM talks with our FAA dude, and he seemed like a good chap. His basic problem was that he was internalizing the FAA's systemic problems, and thereby taking Nate's questioning of the FAA's many failures personally.

No one asked him to do that. No one in their right mind should.

You see, his basic problem is that he gives a ****. We should want him to stop giving a **** so he can be like the gov't employees that everyone complains about. :rolleyes:

This board is not the front porch of aviation any more. :(
 
Back
Top