Kudos to the FAA

[Bell206]

But a process is flawed if the customer must have a deep understanding of the internal machinations of the service provider.

Its not a flaw in the process. Its by design as you are not a customer but a stakeholder in the process. The owner/operator is primarily responsible for the aircraft airworthiness and how its operated. Not the FAA. And those "internal machinations" are far from secret squirrel stuff and are readily available for any owner/operator to satisfy those responsibilities. Regardless, as stakeholders, owner/operators have routes they can take to change the process. However, few do as it is always easier to complain about it than try and work through the process or fix it. A classic example of this is when a new "controversial" AD goes through the NPRM process and only several dozen stakeholders make any effort to comment on it, yet 10s of thousands of owner/operators will be on every forum beeching up a storm about how unfair the AD is. It is what it is.

 

[Salty]

On the IFR “lite” rating. For safety, it would be better to keep the rating requirements the same, but adjust the currency applicability.

Getting my IFR rating made me realize how quickly proficiency is lost, and how easily I’d come to grief. Most of that proficiency loss is in the loggable portion of the approach, and probably in LIFR departures. I’m recently lapsed in my currency, and would never try an approach even if allowed, but believe I’m proficient enough in IMC to maneuver in the enroute environment safely.

It could be a stipulation that if you’re not current, but within X months, you could fly in the system, but not in IMC on either end of a trip (any IFR required airports due to vis & cig would be off limits).

I haven’t thought much about this at all except the last 10 minutes reading this thread, and it’s the internet, so flame on.

I think you also need a larger fuel buffer than even the ifr 45 minutes, since you not only have to be able to get to an alternate, it has to be a vfr alternate. So, for a vfr with ifr enroute flight, maybe an hour extra fuel.

 

[guest user]

I think you also need a larger fuel buffer than even the ifr 45 minutes, since you not only have to be able to get to an alternate, it has to be a vfr alternate. So, for a vfr with ifr enroute flight, maybe an hour extra fuel.

That is one option, or you could set the vis/ceiling minimums allowed to where it is no more an issue than a regular VFR flight.

 

[Sundancer]

Its not a flaw in the process. Its by design as you are not a customer but a stakeholder in the process. The owner/operator is primarily responsible for the aircraft airworthiness and how its operated. Not the FAA. And those "internal machinations" are far from secret squirrel stuff and are readily available for any owner/operator to satisfy those responsibilities. Regardless, as stakeholders, owner/operators have routes they can take to change the process. However, few do as it is always easier to complain about it than try and work through the process or fix it. A classic example of this is when a new "controversial" AD goes through the NPRM process and only several dozen stakeholders make any effort to comment on it, yet 10s of thousands of owner/operators will be on every forum beeching up a storm about how unfair the AD is. It is what it is.

We can agree to disdagree - as I said, some things they do well, and some things they have greatly improved on. But pretty sure they've been hearing about the NOTAM shortcomings for generations, for example. As you say, it is easier to complain versus being pro-active - most GA people have jobs, businesses, careers, etc., to tend to. The advocacy falls to AOPA, EAA, NBAA, etc. mostly, I think?

 

[Sundancer]

But continued push back and griping needs to be directed to have any positive effect…saying “the FAA” sucks when what you’re really complaining about is a specific process isn’t going to change anything.

Concur; this is just a conversation on a pilots board. I don't have an expectation posts here will drive change. Just observing the FAA is a middle-of-the-pack Fed agency, very good at some things, not very good at others. The nature of gov't entites insulated to a degree from accountability.