Thread closed

All American Pilot

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Aug 10, 2022
Messages
11
Display Name

Display name:
AllAmericanPilot
I know that medical certificates are the forefront for pilots needing an ombudsmen to advocate for them. Which other areas within the scope of the FAA do you see needing a public facing liaison to advocate for pilots?
 
I'd be impressed if any two random FSDOs were to provide the same answer to a query. Maybe a secret-shopper effort to force some kinda consistencty on them.

And reg review - some passages are so generic as to make compliance impossible - and swift punishment unavoidable. Familiatire yourself with ALL aspects of a flight? Not possible, and so broadly written as to be a bludgeon in the bureaucrats hands.
 
I'd be impressed if any two random FSDOs were to provide the same answer to a query. Maybe a secret-shopper effort to force some kinda consistencty on them.

And reg review - some passages are so generic as to make compliance impossible - and swift punishment unavoidable. Familiatire yourself with ALL aspects of a flight? Not possible, and so broadly written as to be a bludgeon in the bureaucrats hands.


You know what qualifies to get busted for 91.13? Anything the FAA wants

The secret shopper thing, works well in the private sector, good luck trying to shame a GS worker, they know it nearly takes a act of congress to fire them, they don’t feel shame
 
A fundamental change needs to be done in their written agency mandate from Congress. Their mandate needs to include promoting and assisting the growth of GA, and any action they take in opposition to that needs a complete and rational explanation.

Similar to how they (eventually) made it easier to certify autopilots, there are many other steps that could be taken to lower costs without compromising safety. Especially as our planes get older and parts get harder to obtain, the hurdles needed to maintain them in safe operating condition need to be lowered.
 
A fundamental change needs to be done in their written agency mandate from Congress. Their mandate needs to include promoting and assisting the growth of GA, and any action they take in opposition to that needs a complete and rational explanation.
At one time the FAA charter was to promote aviation. However, due to the obvious conflict of interest, I believe it was congress that removed from their charter or mission statement many years ago. But that didn’t stop their attempts to “promote” the industry and especially the small aircraft side: GARA Act, AGATE, LSA, Safer Skies Initiative, AC 23-27, Part 23 rewrite, and so on.

The effort has been there. The problem is the market, i.e., small private aircraft owner/operators, did not react in the numbers needed to sustain any viable market. So OEMs punted leaving the feds to hold the ball on a limited budget. While it might not be as obvious to most on PoA, those of us that work in the industry have seen small private GA slowly wither for the last 20+ years. It is what it is. Regardless, not all facets of GA are dying with some areas steadily growing. Just look at the markets where the latest clean sheet aircraft designs are targeted. Simple math and economics.
there are many other steps that could be taken to lower costs without compromising safety.
There are. Which ones are in your top 5?
 
X percent of people want to do anything green, which means killing the current version of GA. Unfortunately most GA news that reaches the public is crash related.

There are limited feel good stories about pet or medical transport post hurricane or whatever. My question is is there anything else remotely compelling enough justify flying to the growing greens?
 
Contrary to the title, this thread is apparently not closed.
 
X percent of people want to do anything green, which means killing the current version of GA. Unfortunately most GA news that reaches the public is crash related.

There are limited feel good stories about pet or medical transport post hurricane or whatever. My question is is there anything else remotely compelling enough justify flying to the growing greens?
I think the role that GA plays in providing experienced pilots to the airlines needs to get more publicity. They have to get that 1500 hours somewhere.
 
I looked up the history of that recently, and it turns out the promotion mandate was not removed, just watered down a bit.
In reality the mandate was gutted for all intents and purposes when it came to actually growing GA. And the FAA was doing quite well until this change. Everything that people whine about today like why no new technology or why no new SE small aircraft for GA, were all existing in some form and waiting to move forward in that same timeframe.

Then congress revised the mandate to include reducing the funding. So instead of 8-10 new clean sheet aircraft for GA you got 2. Instead of cutting edge technology available in 2000, it took another 10 years. And so on. Toyota even had a flying Part 23 prototype and had been working on an in-house Part 33 engine.

Though the real world economics of this trend were lacking, when the FAA was pulled out of development circle and was limited back to the enforcement side by congress, the incentives were lost and so was the interest by the main industry and non-industry players. And here we are today.
 
I think the role that GA plays in providing experienced pilots to the airlines needs to get more publicity. They have to get that 1500 hours somewhere.

Which is great until AI takes over. Seems inevitable just a question of 2030 or 2040 or
 
Back
Top