Trump Pushing Personal Pilot To Head FAA? Axios via

I imagine most pilot/owners stick all those documents in the plane somewhere and forget about them. All of mine tied to the plane are in the plane, everything tied to me is in my flight bag. I don't generally actually look for/at them unless I have reason to.
 
I'm a novice pilot, but the reflexive hatred of the FAA on this board baffles me. I've really had nothing but easy experiences with them at the General Aviation level. They processed my student and PPL certificates quickly, registered my new plane purchase easily, and our air traffic system seems pretty reasonable compared to many others around the globe. Interactions with controllers have generally been positive or at least neutral. What is it, exactly, that you want out them that they don't do now?
 
AlleyCat67 said:
I'm a novice pilot, but the reflexive hatred of the FAA on this board baffles me. I've really had nothing but easy experiences with them at the General Aviation level. They processed my student and PPL certificates quickly, registered my new plane purchase easily, and our air traffic system seems pretty reasonable compared to many others around the globe. Interactions with controllers have generally been positive or at least neutral. What is it, exactly, that you want out them that they don't do now?
Click to expand...

You'll get there ;-)

It's a process. Once you have a friend or two who got their ticket pulled or plane grounded due to FAA arbitrary arbitrariness, you'll start to hate them too.
 
Last edited:
AlleyCat67 said:
I'm a novice pilot, but the reflexive hatred of the FAA on this board baffles me. I've really had nothing but easy experiences with them at the General Aviation level. They processed my student and PPL certificates quickly, registered my new plane purchase easily, and our air traffic system seems pretty reasonable compared to many others around the globe. Interactions with controllers have generally been positive or at least neutral. What is it, exactly, that you want out them that they don't do now?
Click to expand...

You need some history to understand that. Especially with Medicals and recurring useless paperwork.

The bureaucracy grows, it doesn’t shrink. Every year.

If you think today’s systems are “easy”, you should have seen when your student certificate was simply printed on the back of your medical, for example. DPEs typed up your other certs on carbon copies in their typewriter at the end of a checkride. Registrations, lasted decades. Special issuance medicals didn’t require three inches of paper and a DVD attached.

This also affects the maintenance folks. The paperwork and silliness there also grows.

They figure out ways to make all of those things you currently think are easy, harder. Just wait a few years.

It’s not hatred, it’s mostly annoyance. Everyone calling dislike “hate” these days, is annoying too. But that’s another topic.
 
Last edited:
AlleyCat67 said:
I'm a novice pilot, but the reflexive hatred of the FAA on this board baffles me. I've really had nothing but easy experiences with them at the General Aviation level. They processed my student and PPL certificates quickly, registered my new plane purchase easily, and our air traffic system seems pretty reasonable compared to many others around the globe. Interactions with controllers have generally been positive or at least neutral. What is it, exactly, that you want out them that they don't do now?
Click to expand...

Most hate because they've been taught to hate.
 
AlleyCat67 said:
I'm a novice pilot, but the reflexive hatred of the FAA on this board baffles me. I've really had nothing but easy experiences with them at the General Aviation level. They processed my student and PPL certificates quickly, registered my new plane purchase easily, and our air traffic system seems pretty reasonable compared to many others around the globe. Interactions with controllers have generally been positive or at least neutral. What is it, exactly, that you want out them that they don't do now?
Click to expand...

Before I did a 141 cert for flight school, before my mechanics got hounded over trivial BS by inspectors-with-grudges, and before those same random inspectors would red-tag working planes for things like "paint chipped on yoke" and "tear in airworthiness cert" (oh please book an appointment 1 week in advance to get a new one typed out) :mad: ....

...I resented them for using 9/11 as a cover for closing their doors to walk-ins and reaping a reduction in pilot-FAA interface and what I am certain is a reduction in "work that people notice". What underhanded cowardice.

I'm sure anyone who has had a working relationship with the FAA knows the "fake smile" "don't discuss anything but the facts" "don't answer unasked questions" mode that is required to deal with these people. Like any petty bureaucrat, they have an outsized and capricious control of your ability to fly. You should hear two ASIs brag with one another about planes they've grounded, like it's a sport. Ugh.

No love lost here. It's not like I get a vote on the top FAA dog, nor have any way to even cause a bad egg any grief whatsoever -- so no point grousing about it. A houseful of Miltons.
 
schmookeeg said:
No love lost here. It's not like I get a vote on the top FAA dog, nor have any way to even cause a bad egg any grief whatsoever -- so no point grousing about it. A houseful of Miltons.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen my PMI/ASI in 3 maybe 4 years.

every thing is done electronically.
I hope in the near future to require all IAs to have a digital signature and to be able to file 337s by electronic methods.
And be required to record each annual they do by electronic methods direct into the aircraft's history records.
 
weilke said:
He is not managing 10s of thousands of employees. His span of control includes 4 associate administrators, and one person titled 'COO of air traffic operations'. Plenty of congress critters have gone directly from a seat on the floor to 'running' a federal agency, what made them qualified ? If you only pull leadership from within the agencies, you end up with a autonomic buerocratic state.
Click to expand...
I never required or suggested someone from the bureacracy. What I would like to see is someome with background in very large organizations that understands a very diverse "customer" base that he/she must successfully work with.
 
The mention of the “post 9/11” security brought this to mind.

The security at the DEN FSDO is so overdone one might mistake it for a prison. No expense spared. It’s insane.

It’d take too long to list the gear I saw let alone the multiple armed guards.

But the most interesting one was judging by the connectivity and electrical boxes I saw, the fence looks like it could be remotely electrified. If not, that’s one hell of a robust fence monitoring system for breaks in the fence.

The fence is heavy too. Nothing cheap. All the way around. You wouldn’t drive any vehicles through it anywhere. And topped with razor wire.

Car entrance has the tire blowing stuff and the armed guards have a clear line of fire to the car entrance. But visitors aren’t allowed to bring cars inside the gate anyway, you park outside in a separate lot near the security shack, and go into the armed security guard hut and have your bags X-rayed and you’re searched if you have a jacket on or anything like that. Two guards eyeballing you.

Even under maximum security statuses where civilians are still allowed on base, I’ve never seen a military base with that much entrance and exit security. Seriously.

Pitiful that FAA can afford such things, considering 1/10th of that would have stopped the FL frequent-flyer psycho kid thing. Not trying to get into that topic, but seriously, what does a FSDO do that requires it to look like a maximum security prison?

It’s not like the 9/11 terrorists were exactly trying to contact FAA personnel to get an AGI and IGI approved. LOL. :)

I posted before about the indoor “experience”. I won’t rehash that but generally an hour of messing with broken PCs and printers for the inspector to use, and me helping him troubleshoot it. LOL. And IACRA being its usual cranky self.
 
schmookeeg said:
Before I did a 141 cert for flight school, before my mechanics got hounded over trivial BS by inspectors-with-grudges, and before those same random inspectors would red-tag working planes for things like "paint chipped on yoke" and "tear in airworthiness cert" (oh please book an appointment 1 week in advance to get a new one typed out) :mad: ....

...I resented them for using 9/11 as a cover for closing their doors to walk-ins and reaping a reduction in pilot-FAA interface and what I am certain is a reduction in "work that people notice". What underhanded cowardice.

I'm sure anyone who has had a working relationship with the FAA knows the "fake smile" "don't discuss anything but the facts" "don't answer unasked questions" mode that is required to deal with these people. Like any petty bureaucrat, they have an outsized and capricious control of your ability to fly. You should hear two ASIs brag with one another about planes they've grounded, like it's a sport. Ugh.

No love lost here. It's not like I get a vote on the top FAA dog, nor have any way to even cause a bad egg any grief whatsoever -- so no point grousing about it. A houseful of Miltons.
Click to expand...

A-freegin'-men. I could have typed that word for word. Well done sir.
kane.gif
 
murphey said:
I never required or suggested someone from the bureacracy. What I would like to see is someome with background in very large organizations that understands a very diverse "customer" base that he/she must successfully work with.
Click to expand...

Like Peña or Salazar? LOL. Gimme a break. :)

Appointees are politicians. Not qualified leadership.

You’ll be waiting the rest of your life if you’re hoping for that.
 
murphey said:
I never required or suggested someone from the bureacracy. What I would like to see is someome with background in very large organizations that understands a very diverse "customer" base that he/she must successfully work with.
Click to expand...

Well, the secretary of state who has that background seems to be doing allright.

Trumps pilot had a customer base of 1.
 
Last edited:
denverpilot said:
Like Peña or Salazar? LOL. Gimme a break. :)

Appointees are politicians. Not qualified leadership.

You’ll be waiting the rest of your life if you’re hoping for that.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with a description of a qualified candidate?
 
denverpilot said:
The mention of the “post 9/11” security brought this to mind.

The security at the DEN FSDO is so overdone one might mistake it for a prison. No expense spared. It’s insane.

It’d take too long to list the gear I saw let alone the multiple armed guards.

But the most interesting one was judging by the connectivity and electrical boxes I saw, the fence looks like it could be remotely electrified. If not, that’s one hell of a robust fence monitoring system for breaks in the fence.

The fence is heavy too. Nothing cheap. All the way around. You wouldn’t drive any vehicles through it anywhere. And topped with razor wire.

Car entrance has the tire blowing stuff and the armed guards have a clear line of fire to the car entrance. But visitors aren’t allowed to bring cars inside the gate anyway, you park outside in a separate lot near the security shack, and go into the armed security guard hut and have your bags X-rayed and you’re searched if you have a jacket on or anything like that. Two guards eyeballing you.

Even under maximum security statuses where civilians are still allowed on base, I’ve never seen a military base with that much entrance and exit security. Seriously.

Pitiful that FAA can afford such things, considering 1/10th of that would have stopped the FL frequent-flyer psycho kid thing. Not trying to get into that topic, but seriously, what does a FSDO do that requires it to look like a maximum security prison?

It’s not like the 9/11 terrorists were exactly trying to contact FAA personnel to get an AGI and IGI approved. LOL. :)

I posted before about the indoor “experience”. I won’t rehash that but generally an hour of messing with broken PCs and printers for the inspector to use, and me helping him troubleshoot it. LOL. And IACRA being its usual cranky self.
Click to expand...
How can you say these things? Can’t you admit that terrorists have targeted the nation’s air traffic system and the FSDO is an essential integral part of that system. Why the Denver FSDO protects thousands of children every year. Maybe even millions.

And you can bet their placards are an essential and well maintained part of the system that protects those children. Yessirree, every men’s room is marked, every women’s room is labeled, every undeclared and indecisive’s room is appropriately labeled. Janitor’s closets are identified along with all companion and solo ways. This is critical stuff and they are on top of it!

Now it is time for you to reassess your overly critical evaluation of the housing of one of the bastions of our nation’s air traffic system. I’m here to tell you that the Denver FSDO is doing a fine job and that they’ve never, never I say, left one aircraft in the sky. They are here to serve you and they do a fine job.
 
murphey said:
What's wrong with a description of a qualified candidate?
Click to expand...

Nothing. It’s just not what political appointees usually are. We can describe them all day, it’s not what we get in political appointees.

Not that it matters much anyway. Like I said, the next level down “lifers” really run these enormous bureaucracies. They’re not going to let a political appointee mess up their systems every four years when they’ve been there 20 or 30 and are about to retire.

They’ve seen political appointees come and go their entire protected, backstabbing peers, careers. They don’t care who’s photo is on the wall this week.
 
denverpilot said:
Nothing. It’s just not what political appointees usually are. We can describe them all day, it’s not what we get in political appointees.

Not that it matters much anyway. Like I said, the next level down “lifers” really run these enormous bureaucracies. They’re not going to let a political appointee mess up their systems every four years when they’ve been there 20 or 30 and are about to retire.

They’ve seen political appointees come and go their entire protected, backstabbing peers, careers. They don’t care who’s photo is on the wall this week.
Click to expand...
careful now, we were the ones who provided continuity of policy..

And when policy change we were the ones who made it happen.

Your old WG-10 s5
 
Tom-D said:
careful now, we were the ones who provided continuity of policy..

And when policy change we were the ones who made it happen.

Your old WG-10 s5
Click to expand...

I have no idea what that means.

I haven’t provided any “continuity of policy” for anyone for anything so you might clarify who “we” is.

If you’re saying bureaucrats stay the same while politicians come and go, I wholeheartedly agree.
 
denverpilot said:
I have no idea what that means.

I haven’t provided any “continuity of policy” for anyone for anything so you might clarify who “we” is.

If you’re saying bureaucrats stay the same while politicians come and go, I wholeheartedly agree.
Click to expand...
WE is your truly, (we) those like me who were the WG wage grade workers s5 = step 5 - supervisor.
Know who you are criticizing :)
 
Tom-D said:
WE is your truly, (we) those like me who were the WG wage grade workers s5 = step 5 - supervisor.
Know who you are criticizing :)
Click to expand...

Who said I was criticizing? I said the bureaucracy runs the same no matter which politician’s photo is on the wall. Whether it runs well or poorly really isn’t up to the political appointee. They’ll be ignored by the lifers anyway.

Lifers know how to survive politicians changing, and are generally protected from being fired.
 
denverpilot said:
The mention of the “post 9/11” security brought this to mind.

The security at the DEN FSDO is so overdone one might mistake it for a prison. No expense spared. It’s insane.

It’d take too long to list the gear I saw let alone the multiple armed guards.

But the most interesting one was judging by the connectivity and electrical boxes I saw, the fence looks like it could be remotely electrified. If not, that’s one hell of a robust fence monitoring system for breaks in the fence.

The fence is heavy too. Nothing cheap. All the way around. You wouldn’t drive any vehicles through it anywhere. And topped with razor wire.

Car entrance has the tire blowing stuff and the armed guards have a clear line of fire to the car entrance. But visitors aren’t allowed to bring cars inside the gate anyway, you park outside in a separate lot near the security shack, and go into the armed security guard hut and have your bags X-rayed and you’re searched if you have a jacket on or anything like that. Two guards eyeballing you.

Even under maximum security statuses where civilians are still allowed on base, I’ve never seen a military base with that much entrance and exit security. Seriously.

Pitiful that FAA can afford such things, considering 1/10th of that would have stopped the FL frequent-flyer psycho kid thing. Not trying to get into that topic, but seriously, what does a FSDO do that requires it to look like a maximum security prison?

It’s not like the 9/11 terrorists were exactly trying to contact FAA personnel to get an AGI and IGI approved. LOL. :)

I posted before about the indoor “experience”. I won’t rehash that but generally an hour of messing with broken PCs and printers for the inspector to use, and me helping him troubleshoot it. LOL. And IACRA being its usual cranky self.
Click to expand...

The people that are supposed to serve us have carved out their own little dictatorships, and revel in their ability to bring our lives to a full stop.

If God were just, someone would show up at this FSDO and start an investigation. I suppose their money and power came from a long trail, starting at the Congressman whose district it's in and winding its way down to the guy behind the desk who operates like the warden in the Shawshank Redemption.
 
denverpilot said:
The mention of the “post 9/11” security brought this to mind.

The security at the DEN FSDO is so overdone one might mistake it for a prison. No expense spared. It’s insane.

It’d take too long to list the gear I saw let alone the multiple armed guards.

But the most interesting one was judging by the connectivity and electrical boxes I saw, the fence looks like it could be remotely electrified. If not, that’s one hell of a robust fence monitoring system for breaks in the fence.

The fence is heavy too. Nothing cheap. All the way around. You wouldn’t drive any vehicles through it anywhere. And topped with razor wire.

Car entrance has the tire blowing stuff and the armed guards have a clear line of fire to the car entrance. But visitors aren’t allowed to bring cars inside the gate anyway, you park outside in a separate lot near the security shack, and go into the armed security guard hut and have your bags X-rayed and you’re searched if you have a jacket on or anything like that. Two guards eyeballing you.

Even under maximum security statuses where civilians are still allowed on base, I’ve never seen a military base with that much entrance and exit security. Seriously.

Pitiful that FAA can afford such things, considering 1/10th of that would have stopped the FL frequent-flyer psycho kid thing. Not trying to get into that topic, but seriously, what does a FSDO do that requires it to look like a maximum security prison?

It’s not like the 9/11 terrorists were exactly trying to contact FAA personnel to get an AGI and IGI approved. LOL. :)

I posted before about the indoor “experience”. I won’t rehash that but generally an hour of messing with broken PCs and printers for the inspector to use, and me helping him troubleshoot it. LOL. And IACRA being its usual cranky self.
Click to expand...
That's strange. The FSDO near me doesn't have a fence. It's just a building in an office park that anyone can drive/walk up to. There are armed security guards and metal detectors/X-ray machines when you walk in the front entrance. I'm lucky that I can skip past that stuff since I have an FAA contractor badge.
 
MassPilot said:
That's strange. The FSDO near me doesn't have a fence. It's just a building in an office park that anyone can drive/walk up to. There are armed security guards and metal detectors/X-ray machines when you walk in the front entrance. I'm lucky that I can skip past that stuff since I have an FAA contractor badge.
Click to expand...
Sounds like there are other offices in the building. FSDO here used to be in a federal building with other agencies and high security, well before 9/11.
 
Palmpilot said:
This guy argues that the bureaucracies we all love to hate are part of what's protecting us from fascism. His thesis is that our government has gotten so big that no one person can control it. Of course, the downside of that is that we have the occasional petty dictators at various levels of government.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/03/01/no-fascism-cant-happen-here-217092?cid=apn
Click to expand...
What crap! "Has nothing to do with Donald Trump" yet the big image is a pic of the president.

Propaganda much?
 
I'm pretty sure the FAA had little to nothing to do with the dictates of Force Protection. Let's keep focused on stuff they (FAA) do control to be upset over. There's plenty of that...
 
denverpilot said:
Who said I was criticizing? I said the bureaucracy runs the same no matter which politician’s photo is on the wall. Whether it runs well or poorly really isn’t up to the political appointee. They’ll be ignored by the lifers anyway.

Lifers know how to survive politicians changing, and are generally protected from being fired.
Click to expand...
This is known as the Deep State.
 
paflyer said:
What crap! "Has nothing to do with Donald Trump" yet the big image is a pic of the president.

Propaganda much?
Click to expand...
Sounds like you didn't read it.
 
paflyer said:
That's right- I couldn't get past the obvious "subliminal message."

The word "fascist" over a pic of Trump. Classic.
Click to expand...
No one's saying you have to read anything you don't want to, but not reading an article is not a valid way to judge its content.
 
denverpilot said:
The mention of the “post 9/11” security brought this to mind.

The security at the DEN FSDO is so overdone one might mistake it for a prison. No expense spared. It’s insane.

It’d take too long to list the gear I saw let alone the multiple armed guards.

But the most interesting one was judging by the connectivity and electrical boxes I saw, the fence looks like it could be remotely electrified. If not, that’s one hell of a robust fence monitoring system for breaks in the fence.

The fence is heavy too. Nothing cheap. All the way around. You wouldn’t drive any vehicles through it anywhere. And topped with razor wire.

Car entrance has the tire blowing stuff and the armed guards have a clear line of fire to the car entrance. But visitors aren’t allowed to bring cars inside the gate anyway, you park outside in a separate lot near the security shack, and go into the armed security guard hut and have your bags X-rayed and you’re searched if you have a jacket on or anything like that. Two guards eyeballing you.

Even under maximum security statuses where civilians are still allowed on base, I’ve never seen a military base with that much entrance and exit security. Seriously.

Pitiful that FAA can afford such things, considering 1/10th of that would have stopped the FL frequent-flyer psycho kid thing. Not trying to get into that topic, but seriously, what does a FSDO do that requires it to look like a maximum security prison?

It’s not like the 9/11 terrorists were exactly trying to contact FAA personnel to get an AGI and IGI approved. LOL. :)

I posted before about the indoor “experience”. I won’t rehash that but generally an hour of messing with broken PCs and printers for the inspector to use, and me helping him troubleshoot it. LOL. And IACRA being its usual cranky self.
Click to expand...

That's because of the NWO man!

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/...er-international-airport-conspiracy-theories/
 
Shopshirt said:
That's because of the NWO man!

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/...er-international-airport-conspiracy-theories/
Click to expand...

Looks like you killed their website. LOL. Dang it. I wanted to see what that was. :)

Can we have the Rocky Mountain News back? I loathe the Denver Post. So much suck and yet with newspapers flailing everywhere they still won’t die. They did move their offices out of downtown last year though, so they could be further from breaking news, but mostly because they’re broke. LOL.
 
Palmpilot said:
PART of. I read the whole article, not just the photo and headline.
Click to expand...

The article is weak IMO. The premise is basically that having vast swaths of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats is a good thing because they can guide policy of their own volition (and save us from fascists or the like).

I'm not making an argument against having the FAA or whatever, but I just don't think that's the proper, constitutional view to hold of our government's power structure.
 
Bonchie said:
The article is weak IMO. The premise is basically that having vast swaths of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats is a good thing because they can guide policy of their own volition (and save us from fascists or the like).
Click to expand...

That's a pretty selective paraphrasing. In his concluding remarks, he makes clear his view that big government has both good and bad consequences:

All of this is not to suggest that bigger government is always better. A government that is too big involves high costs in terms of efficiency and arguably justice. The former Soviet Union is one example of such a disastrous system.

Excess government may cause slow growth, and if government is far too large, it may cause a more general breakdown of social order and thus also a collapse of rule. And that actually is the most plausible path from very large government to fascism, namely through an intermediate state of political chaos, including, for a while, what is likely to be a much smaller government. If you consider the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Soviet economic model failed, the Soviet government lost its support, the Soviet empire fell apart, revenue dried up, and there was a power vacuum throughout parts of the 1990s. The eventual result of that vacuum was Vladimir Putin and the construction of a new fascism. The point here is not whether Putin is better or worse than the old Soviet Union (I would say better, at least so far). Rather, even a highly statist system required an intermediate period of collapse and smaller government, and a partial falling away of the preexisting bureaucracy, before making a phase transition to a new fascism.

Choosing a complex governmental structure to minimize the risk of a fascist takeover also involves forgoing some potential upside from major reforms. With a larger government, the society will be more prone to ossification and stagnation, as the permanent bureaucracy will overregulate the economy and be very difficult to pare back. In many Western societies, it is very difficult to get rid of excess bureaucracy and regulation, to the detriment of dynamism and economic growth. Just as we are insulated from a fascist takeover, so are we probably stuck with some of the less efficient features of modern social democracies. For all the bipartisan agreement that regulatory reform in some manner is needed, very few Western countries have succeeded with it.

We can therefore think of the ongoing evolution and cementing of Big Government, in the social welfare and bureaucratic senses of that term, is an extended exercise in risk aversion. Since Western governments became more bureaucratic and complex, we haven’t had much in the way of fascist takeovers, or even serious attempts in those directions. We also haven’t had that much in the way of sweeping reforms in the deregulatory direction. These are two sides of the same coin, and they represent a deliberate decision to opt for, or at least to allow, a relatively stable course with a minimum of risk of excess deviation toward any particular extreme political direction.

No, it can’t happen here. Not anytime soon. Trump or no Trump. That is both our blessing and, when you think through all of its implications, our curse as well.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top