Anyone know what ALPA is referring to as their "common sense solution".
If they are in opposition to the Bill, then it would seem one would have to understand what their specific issues are and what compromise they are suggesting.
Anyone know what ALPA is referring to as their "common sense solution".
If they are in opposition to the Bill, then it would seem one would have to understand what their specific issues are and what compromise they are suggesting.
All the ALPA members I know, support PBOR2 and don't understand why ALPA is taking this position.
One explanation I read is that ALPA is trying to avoid having an precedent established where Congress specifies the medical requirements required for flying.Originally Posted by Patrick Donovan
Still weasels, though.
Ron "Ain't specifying ALPA or Congess" Wanttaja
I can see their concern with that precedent being set. The FAA may move slow, but at least they are aviation minded. It would be a disaster to have Congress setting aviation policy. That essentially puts aviation policy in the hands of the "under-informed and under-educated" average American when it comes to aviation.
I certainly don't want Joe Blow on the street determining what "safe" is when it comes to aviation. We'd all be wearing parachutes on commercial airliners if they did
Would it be worse for Congress to set aviation policy? The FAA makes it very expensive to bring new products to market and to maintain and upgrade existing products. Air traffic regulations and airport infrastructure spending priorities make private air travel impractical for ordinary Americans. Medical requirements are not based on any studies of the costs and benefits.
I wonder, would you prefer all motor vehicle and road traffic laws were replaced by DMV regulations?
Lets go back to the 1970's. Senator Hale Boggs was lost in Alaska when his C-310 was presumed to have picked up a load of ice and was never found. After a big search, the Senate declined to wait for the FAA and they passed the ELT requirement, by-passing FAA. How did you like those old 1970 ELT's?
It's a mixed bag.
Sometimes Congress is required to "bypass" regulatory bodies in order to get things done - like throwing great gobs of money at airports. Your average County airport is a money pit, requiring far more in subsidy than it generates in economic activity. That's okay - there are a lot of things that are like that and it doesn't mean they're bad.
And we must remember that Agencies are charged with making regulations in the spirit of the laws passed that guide them. Congress is the check against the power of regulation if it runs counter to their wishes. The system, 99% of the time, works. Agencies can update regulations to fit changes in technology or needs far easier than laws can be changed.
The stream works the other way, too. Agencies will go to Congress asking for authorization and funding of initiatives, as they have no ability to generate their own funding (unless it's specifically authorized by Congress).
In this case, the FAA and the DoT have purposely slow walked a change in policy that is reasonable and popular. If the FAA and the DoT had done their job (or, if they got the lead out of their butts and changed the regulation) it would make legislative efforts disappear. They really are some knuckleheads for not getting the message on this once Congress got involved with more than just inquiries.
On the professional pilot side (or at least this one organization), they envision Barons and C-172's flying willy-nilly into the path of 747's, the pilots of which are adjusting their oxygen flow due to emphysema with one hand and their eye patch with the other. It's not going to work that way, but there are more than a few professional pilots who think GA is full of irresponsible yokels. We are the damned kids that just won't get off their lawn.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
Yeah, they forget they were once GA pilots too. Just like politicians, they were "regular folks" once too. Then they got where they are, just like airline drivers, and say the hell with everyone else.
I take it you thought they were bad, and they would have been better if congress had waited a little longer for the FAA to write a regulation. That's one data point.
A bunch of professional pilots never flew GA. They went from the military straight into the carriers. And they don't fly on their days off.
Kind of weird to think that there are some guys out there flying for a living that never sat behind a propellor, or did so for just a few hours long, long ago.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote