Check it out:
http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/A...aspx?CMP=ADV:1
Printable View
Check it out:
http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/A...aspx?CMP=ADV:1
I live in SE Louisiana and my bird bath froze over. Does that count? :-)
David
If this does indeed change I will be going after my PPL.
Tony
Maybe I am overly suspicious of the FAA, but I don't seriously believe we would have heard anything from Mr Huerta had there not been a bill introduced into Congress to overstep what was in the petition. The best way to get action out of the FAA is to take away their power via Congress. The apology is likely a delaying tactic and rings hollow. It is designed only to make us think they *might* do something. The FAA has had 2 years to act and has refused to do so. So let's get behind the congressional bill with more liberal boundaries for pilots and make it law.
-CubBuilder
There's a comment over at the AOPA website (that I agree with) that says more-or-less, at this point there's no reason for FAA to move on this. If the bill currently before Congress fails, then the FAA can state that by Congressional vote this idea in general is not supported. If the bill passes, FAA will have to execute, but if safety is negatively impacted, they'll be able to say "not our fault, we're just doing what you told us to do, and oh, by the way, we told you so."Quote:
Originally Posted by cub builder
If I was FAA, especially given strictures caused by sequestration, I wouldn't lift a finger beyond my core responsibilities. Why make a decision and change SOP when my boss (Congress) has announced he's going to be point person on the issue?
So, I agree with CubBuilder - let's focus on the bill and help make it law.
[QUOTE=Jeff Boatright;38117]There's a comment over at the AOPA website (that I agree with) that says more-or-less, at this point there's no reason for FAA to move on this. If the bill currently before Congress fails, then the FAA can state that by Congressional vote this idea in general is not supported. If the bill passes, FAA will have to execute, but if safety is negatively impacted, they'll be able to say "not our fault, we're just doing what you told us to do, and oh, by the way, we told you so."
If I was FAA, especially given strictures caused by sequestration, I wouldn't lift a finger beyond my core responsibilities. Why make a decision and change SOP when my boss (Congress) has announced he's going to be point person on the issue?
Well said Jeff!,
I think you nailed the Washington Agency headset. I'd only add that the head of the FAA is a political appointee so what comes out of their mouths has to line up with the policies of the administration that made his/her appointment.
Joe
:cool:
Sorta reminds me of EAA's MoGas STC request that I understand was stuck at FAA - until Senator Barry Goldwater got after them.
I remember all the horrible things that were going to happen if you dared to use auto fuel (before the Peterson and EAA STC). I've used auto fuel in both my Cherokee 140 and Champs for over 25 years with zero problems. I'm thinking the same thing about the third class medical and now they have a history to point to that shows no difference between those with a third class medical and those of us flying under light sport.