Cutting regulations

[saber25]

"We're gonna be cutting regulation massively," the president said. "The problem with the regulation that we have right now is that you can't do anything. You can't, I have people that tell me they have more people working on regulations than they have doing product."

I wonder if this also applies to the FAA and its regulatory building castle? Decreasing the size and volume of regulations that have been promulgated these past 40 years would be a welcome relief.

[rwanttaja]

"We're gonna be cutting regulation massively," the president said. "The problem with the regulation that we have right now is that you can't do anything. You can't, I have people that tell me they have more people working on regulations than they have doing product."

I wonder if this also applies to the FAA and its regulatory building castle? Decreasing the size and volume of regulations that have been promulgated these past 40 years would be a welcome relief.
Not enough visibility (e.g., less political advantage), and the FAA can always claim "Required for Safety." Besides, we just got simplified certification and medical policy.

Federal regulations are a huge Jenga stack. It may seem easy to winkle out one or two, but there's the potential to really make things come crashing down if the wrong combination is picked. On one hand, you have the President and a small group of political appointees, on the other hand you have a massive bureaucracy with a vested interest in the status quo. In many cases, given regulations are required by Acts of Congress (think of the changes after the Colgan crash) and those acts would need to be repealed before action can be taken. A bureaucrat could fight a delaying action for years.

I am reminded of the play/movie "Amadeus," when the Emperor has to pretend he has SOME sort of knowledge of music, after listening to the premiere of a Mozart opera:

"My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect. "

The picking out which notes to cut is the hard part.....

Ron "Why don't I have three heads" Wanttaja

[martymayes]

I wonder if this also applies to the FAA and its regulatory building castle.Ah, no. I think they are referring to different regulations, however, for the sake of conversation:

If you would like to see a single FAA regulation eliminated, which one would it be?

[saber25]

Actually, it was more of a question to those assembled that have witnessed the increasing volume of the FAR's while the total pilot population has dramatically decreased in the past decades. 49 years have passed since my PP and the book has increased substantially while I find the style of flying I do fits nicely into the FAR's as published in '68.


But since the question was raised which reg would I change, I would not require ADS-B unless you fly in airspace class A or B.

[rwanttaja]

Actually, it was more of a question to those assembled that have witnessed the increasing volume of the FAR's while the total pilot population has dramatically decreased in the past decades. 49 years have passed since my PP and the book has increased substantially while I find the style of flying I do fits nicely into the FAR's as published in '68.
I think the increased regulatory volume is probably mostly due to the increased complexity of the airspace, hence my suspicion that we won't see any regulatory relief. If it does trigger "Airspace simplification", my guess is we won't like it...they're more likely to place more airspace under control in the guise of safety.

Personally, I'd like to see the requirement for the Third Class medical totally eliminated. But this is one of those cases I referred to earlier...the current setup was directed by bill generated by Congress, with restrictions demanded by various Congresscritters, and signed by the President. It'd take someone to introduce a bill and ram it through both houses of Congress to repeal it.

Ron Wanttaja

[Auburntsts]

Actually, it was more of a question to those assembled that have witnessed the increasing volume of the FAR's while the total pilot population has dramatically decreased in the past decades. 49 years have passed since my PP and the book has increased substantially while I find the style of flying I do fits nicely into the FAR's as published in '68.


But since the question was raised which reg would I change, I would not require ADS-B unless you fly in airspace class A or B.


Not sure what you mean by increasing volume of FARs. I got my Private back in 1986 and while there have been changes, the FARs that are most relevant to me, parts 61 and 91, are roughly the same.

[FlyingRon]

Actually the regulations tend to periodically get overhauled. As far as 14 CFR goes we've had 61 and 23 rewrites in recent memory. Cleaning up the regulations is certainly an achievable task if there is mandate (and some stooge hasn't frozen changes). The real mess is the actual LAW: the USC. That requires an act of congress to change and it is full of drek (especially in things like the tax code).

[1600vw]

IMHO they should redo the ultralight rule. A two place quicksilver should be an ultralight, as should any airplane that weighs twice what the pilot weighs. But it's not the fars or rules holding aviation back. It's the attitudes of those in aviation holding aviation back. If you can find an old school aviator he/she will help you and not break your bank account doing it. I know of one man who does Condition inspections for 150 bucks and he comes to you. But I only know one man who will do this. He is getting up in years and may not do this much longer. He will also do some training without breaking the bank. He charges me 40 bucks a half hour. This is using his airplane with fuel or wet and all. Grand total 40 bucks for 30 mins. Everyone else wants double his rates. Once this man is gone I hate to think what the services this man performs will cost from someone else. This is what is holding aviation back. The people involved.

[martymayes]

So we need to cut all the people out of aviation?

[rwanttaja]

So we need to cut all the people out of aviation?
Just the ugly ones. We'll form our OWN club!

Ron "Face made for radio" Wanttaja

[DaleB]

IMHO they should redo the ultralight rule. A two place quicksilver should be an ultralight,
If you want to go there, where arbitrary cutoffs make little sense, I have a long list of planes that should be fine to fly under Sport Pilot privileges, but aren't. The 150/152 pilots would probably agree that if my RV-12 is LSA legal, their planes should be... but, no. Obviously the mighty Cessna 152 is far too dangerous.

Some examples are truly ridiculous. You can have two identical Aeronca Champs, with every single part matching as well as every detail of their history. Same engine, same prop, same equipment, landing gear, service history, everything. Totally identical, indistinguishable other than the N-number. One is LSA legal, the other is not and can never be made so, ever.

Sigh... These things don't have to make sense, they just are.

And you're right about the expense, but this is just not a cheap hobby. Probably never has been; I remember it being completely out of reach for me in the early 80s when I could have flown for $20 per hour wet. Some things just aren't cheap.

[martymayes]

Just the ugly ones. We'll form our OWN club!



I'm in! and if that doesn't work, I know the bikers will take me!

[Frank Giger]

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

Oddly enough, I've found that the vast majority of regulations just don't touch my little corner of aviation. I fly from an uncontrolled field in my little one seat homebuilt as a Sport Pilot.

[rwanttaja]

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
I've always considered you the Khloe Kardashian of homebuilding.


Oddly enough, I've found that the vast majority of regulations just don't touch my little corner of aviation. I fly from an uncontrolled field in my little one seat homebuilt as a Sport Pilot.
Having got my license in the distant mists o' the past (1972) it's an interesting thing to contemplate. Airspace is more complex (don't remember even TCAs back then), and aircraft equipment requirements are more complex (transponders, ADS-B, etc.) Looking through a table of contents for Part 91, trying to guess what's been added since. Note that many (most) of Part 91 has been AMENDED since then; I'm just looking for brand-new requirements.

Subpart A (General)
- Probably modified 91.17 (Alcohol or drugs)
- 91.19, carriage of drugs, marihuana, etc.
- 91.21, truth-in-leasing
- 91.25 Aviation Safety Reporting Program

Subpart B (Flight Rules)
- 91.126-91.135, operations in Class A-G airspace
- 91.137 & 138, TFRs for disaster areas
- 91.141, restrictions on flight in proximity of the President
- 91.143, restrictions in proximity of space operations
- 91.146, passenger-carrying for charitable events
For the VFR section of Part B, I don't really see any new requirements. For the IFR section, maybe a couple.

Subpart C (Equipment, Instrument, and Certificate Requirements)
- 91.215, Transponder
- 91.217, Transponder data correspondence
- 91.219, Altitude alerting device (turbojet aircraft only)
- 91.221-227, traffic alert systems, terrain warning, ADS-B, etc.

Subpart D (Special Flight Operations)
- 91.321, carriage of candidates in elections
- 91.325, Primary Category Aircraft
- 91.327 LSAs

Subpart E (Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and Alterations)
- 91.411, Altimeter system and altitude reporting tests
- 91.413, ATC Transponder tests

So while there have been items added to Part 91, most don't really concern those of us that fly for the enjoyment of it. Mostly, as I said, the more-complex airspace and the transponder/ADS-B requirements.

Part 61 probably tightened up on medical conditions a bit. Part 43 basic outline probably hasn't changed much. Part 23 has undergone two major revisions, of course.

Probably the worst thing that has happened has been the rise in bureaucratic reluctance on the part of the FAA as far as allowing field approvals. An IA used to be able to just install a radio, now the FAA wants full paperwork and its own buyoff on it.

Ron Wanttaja