DOGE and the FAA

Dave Anderson

Dave Anderson

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
529
Location
Twice a month beside Biden's WH retreat.
Display Name
Display name:
SkyDreams
Ok, can we have a real discussion and try to keep this thread from being killed immediately?

With Elon and Vivek running the Department of Gov Efficiency (let’s just assume this is gonna be effective and make some great changes for this discussion)

What would you cut at the FAA? What would you change?

I would start by firing many involved with the insanity of MOSIAC and the red tape it is taking l to get this in play!

FAA airport infrastructure
 
Kinda seems like FAA is understaffed if anything.

I am concerned ATC user fees will be a fight again, although all these guys have been flying private jets for a long time, so maybe not?

Will they go after grants to small GA airports? Maybe? Anything too short for a Gulfstream? Maybe their pilots can bend their ear?

My crystal ball is pretty cloudy around all this stuff.
 
Mason said:
As I understand it, the DOGE will not be an official government department, and thus will not need any approvals or confirmations, nor will they have any authority to make any changes. They can only make recommendations.
Click to expand...
Correct. Government agencies (and the necessary funding) can only be appropriated by Congress. I imagine this "DOGE" initiative, the seriousness of which can be gleaned from its own name, will turn out to be something like this.
Something built for appearance primarily; more smoke than fire.
 
No need to guess. From the transition plan doc, 3 pages of changes to FAA start on page 632.
 
Last edited:
Any chance DOGE is named after the crypto Musk was hawking
 
Baked Potato said:
I imagine this "DOGE" initiative, the seriousness of which can be gleaned from its own name, will turn out to be something like this.
Something built for appearance primarily; more smoke than fire.
Click to expand...
I think that’s spot-on and you cite the very example that immediately came to mind.
 
MountainDude said:
If the data showing that basic med and 3rd class medicals have the same accident rate are accurate, I hope they get rid of 3rd class for private pilots.
Click to expand...
So hang on…

A requirement for Basic Med is to have had a previous 1/2/3, if I’m not mistaken. If they get rid of 3, seems like that would mean one would need a 1 or 2 before moving to Basic Med. Granted, a 2 is basically a 3 with a shorter lifespan but is that what you’re meaning to say you hope for or are you hoping one can get a Basic Med without ever having passed any flight PE?
 
I think like a lot of things people are discussing post election, we really don't know and anyone's predictions range from educated guesses to wild speculation. My wild speculation is that the FAA will be way down the priorities list and GA specifically will be even farther down. Also just in general messing with the FAA is high-risk politically- if you pull out a reg and there's a crash someone can say was because of that change you're going to have to own it. Nothing would surprise me but I don't expect major change.

Now, if I was in charge I'd basically eliminate the 3rd class medical- essentially put everyone on basic med without the passing the third class requirement. Thus cutting the need to process them.
 
The third class medical is a good idea. The execution sucks.

One example is the insistence that children medicated by social influences are forever a threat as adults to perform some hienous act that will cause death and destruction via a small aircraft.

There are others.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
So hang on…

A requirement for Basic Med is to have had a previous 1/2/3, if I’m not mistaken. If they get rid of 3, seems like that would mean one would need a 1 or 2 before moving to Basic Med. Granted, a 2 is basically a 3 with a shorter lifespan but is that what you’re meaning to say you hope for or are you hoping one can get a Basic Med without ever having passed any flight PE?
Click to expand...
That is the current requirement. I am hoping they will get rid of both 3rd class medical and the need to have it before you can go to BM. Basically, they should just let pilots get a basic med. If a physician thinks a person should not fly, that's good enough.
 
MountainDude said:
If the data showing that basic med and 3rd class medicals have the same accident rate are accurate, I hope they get rid of 3rd class for private pilots.
Click to expand...
It’s stuff like this that I hope the DOGE could solve because there’s a strong push from Musk to reduce red tape etc. Mostly self servicing so he can get to Mars but there is entirely too much regulation tape in DC
 
Jim K said:
Kinda seems like FAA is understaffed if anything.

I am concerned ATC user fees will be a fight again, although all these guys have been flying private jets for a long time, so maybe not?

Will they go after grants to small GA airports? Maybe? Anything too short for a Gulfstream? Maybe their pilots can bend their ear?

My crystal ball is pretty cloudy around all this stuff
Click to expand...

Understaffed maybe but I do think like most agencies not actually efficient
 
Dave Anderson said:
What would you cut at the FAA? What would you change?
Click to expand...

Agree with others, I don't think the FAA is overstaffed or over funded. As others have mentioned I would get rid of the Third Class Medical.

Dave Anderson said:
I would start by firing many involved with the insanity of MOSIAC and the red tape it is taking l to get this in play!
Click to expand...

My concern is that Trump may create a new "2 for 1" executive order that will likely have a HUGE impact on when the MOSAIC final rule gets published.
 
idahoflier said:
My concern is that Trump may create a new "2 for 1" executive order that will likely have a HUGE impact on when the MOSAIC final rule gets published.
Click to expand...
Probably will completely kill MOSAIC. If the FAA has to do a "2 for 1," there are other things they'd rather protect than something relaxing standards.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Dave Anderson said:
Link?
Click to expand...
Attached. Important to note that this is a 3rd party’s suggestions, not adopted policies.

Several things I don’t like - they advocate for user fees because “Everyone else does it” without consideration of how GA is stifled everywhere else. They expect the FAA to cover its own costs, which is disastrous for the future of aviation.

But at least AOPA has new fodder for lobbying.
 

Attachments

  • 2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
    6.8 MB · Views: 28
Dave Anderson said:
It’s stuff like this that I hope the DOGE could solve because there’s a strong push from Musk to reduce red tape etc. Mostly self servicing so he can get to Mars but there is entirely too much regulation tape in DC
Click to expand...
Agree - he has been very critical of the inefficiency of their review processes. There are literally rockets already built waiting for FAA paperwork to be shuffled before launching.

In the end it’s a bureaucracy which has rules and procedures that the workers cannot depart from. There is good and bad in that.
 
There was an aviation podcast that started around Trump one. Every episode had a Trump aviation issue. Quite a few were related to the airports near his club in Florida but there were others regarding user fees and other things which seemed to show little regard for regular pilots in small planes.

Aviation news talk? Hangar talk? I don’t remember

Anyway, I’d keep an ear open
 
bflynn said:
They expect the FAA to cover its own costs, which is disastrous for the future of aviation.
Click to expand...
Im not necessarily disagreeing but we could replace “FAA” with a number of other things with the same basic statement (National Parks, farm subsidies, student aid, FDA oversight of food and drug safety, etc.). There’s a tendency to say “if it doesn’t benefit me personally then it’s government waste but if it DOES benefit me, then it should be supported even if others need to pitch in”.

By and large, based on sheer volume, the FAA is (appropriately) oriented around commercial air travel. We in GA are about like 100LL: more or less a “boutique group”, sometimes with more hassle than the profit margin is worth.

I do think we should carry our “fair load” - which may or may not be our “full load”. I think user fees would likely do more harm than good, by disincentivizing flying currency. But I think the tax on fuel is the most sensible way right now and could be tweaked as appropriate.

Circling back, I think airline tickets and maybe some tax on air cargo (which probably exists - not sure) is the most sensible way to pay for the lion’s share of the FAA.

Heaven forbid we “third party” the FAA. Every time that happens - camping reservations at National Parks, toll roads, whatever - they seem more “efficient” but user costs also seem to go up considerably, in my experience. The profit for the company comes from somewhere and it’s not just “improved efficiency”.
 
bflynn said:
Attached. Important to note that this is a 3rd party’s suggestions, not adopted policies.

Several things I don’t like - they advocate for user fees because “Everyone else does it” without consideration of how GA is stifled everywhere else. They expect the FAA to cover its own costs, which is disastrous for the future of aviation.

But at least AOPA has new fodder for lobbying.
Click to expand...
I click on that and it says “do you want to download….” I do. Now what? What do I do to see it? I’m on an IPad mini 6.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Heaven forbid we “third party” the FAA. Every time that happens - camping reservations at National Parks, toll roads, whatever - they seem more “efficient” but user costs also seem to go up considerably, in my experience. The profit for the company comes from somewhere and it’s not just “improved efficiency”.
Click to expand...
Yup. "Private enterprise will always do it better" is a fallacy. Example: https://www.sfgate.com/california-p...ctor-aramark-endangered-visitors-19449430.php
 
Just a couple of points from my vantage.

As much as we want 3rd class medicals to go away, until you get buy-in for Basic med from other countries you just can't. Would be better to overhaul the medical system to remove so much of the bureaucracy, but that applies to 99% of the Federal government.

I've seen a lot of discussion regarding DOGE and looking for wasteful spending. But the examples I've seen revolve around money spent on things I think everyone agrees is ridiculous, ex. $200,000 to research mating habits of butterflies in Cambodia, $500,000 to investigate transgender monkeys in Peru, etc. We've always heard of these wasteful spending items getting buried in bills, yet they still continue.
 
wanttaja said:
Probably will completely kill MOSAIC. If the FAA has to do a "2 for 1," there are other things they'd rather protect than something relaxing standards.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

Isn’t every AD a rule?
 
The FAA, like other government agencies is top heavy with management, and a large portion of that management does nothing constructive. That would be a first step in cutting cost to eliminate those positions.

Streamlining processes such as training program approvals, manual approvals, MEL, etc would also free up resources. Those approvals could be done electronically.

Realign the DPE program. Currently there are 935 DPE's nationwide. Of that 935, 75% of all test are administered by 350 DPE's, with 50% of those test done by 200 DPE's. So 37% of all DPE's are administering 75% of all exams. The problem is, to hold a DPE one only needs to perform 5 checks per year. A rewrite of the program and requiring DPE's to actually perform more checks would increase availability as well as bring down cost to the consumer.

There are many programs within the FAA that could be rewritten and streamlined which would benefit airmen and operators while reducing internal cost.
 
Dave Anderson said:
What would you cut at the FAA? What would you change?
Click to expand...
One thing to keep in mind is 80%+ of the FARs service the international conventions and agreements the US is a signatory to. Without those FARs no agreements. But interestingly if you compare the FARs to other NAA regulatory systems those systems have 2x or more rules than the FAA has.

As to the FAA itself its currently about half the size it was when I started in aviation 40+ years ago. And its budget is similar. But the last thing you want is a fee based regulartory system like the EASA has. And if you talk to anyone in the industry the FAA system is the least complex, least burdensome of any reg system in the world by far. However, there are some FAA processes that could definitely be redone and simplified even more. The Part 23 rewrite is a prime example.
 
It's just a bright, shiny object to distract, to show the great unwashed how much the people who spent millions of their own money to get power are attempting to "reduce spending your tax money" while the usual predators scheme yet another raid on the treasury.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I've seen a lot of discussion regarding DOGE and looking for wasteful spending. But the examples I've seen revolve around money spent on things I think everyone agrees is ridiculous, ex. $200,000 to research mating habits of butterflies in Cambodia, $500,000 to investigate transgender monkeys in Peru, etc. We've always heard of these wasteful spending items getting buried in bills, yet they still continue.
Click to expand...
We’ve all seen/heard/read that kind of craziness. What we’ve never seen, to my knowledge, is a credible explanation of exactly HOW that money got allocated. I’d love it if we could just track down exactly who allocated or approved those kinds of expenditures so those people could be fired. Do that a few dozen times, get the message out that government money needs to be spent for the actual benefit the US or you’ll be looking for a new job, and I think at least some of the problem would solve itself.
 
Dave Anderson said:
Ok, can we have a real discussion and try to keep this thread from being killed immediately?

With Elon and Vivek running the Department of Gov Efficiency (let’s just assume this is gonna be effective and make some great changes for this discussion)

What would you cut at the FAA? What would you change?

I would start by firing many involved with the insanity of MOSIAC and the red tape it is taking l to get this in play!

FAA airport infrastructure
Click to expand...
Nobody can deny the bureaucracies need serious trimming. Incredible waste of tax dollars has been going on for decades
 
I'm amazed this thread didn't go sideways and become political. It's refreshing. Thanks for staying on topic and allowing various opinions to emerge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Doc Holliday said:
The FAA, like other government agencies is top heavy with management, and a large portion of that management does nothing constructive. That would be a first step in cutting cost to eliminate those positions
Click to expand...
Can you back that up, especially the “…does nothing constructive”? And is it worse than in private industry?

Kinda sounds like a trope but I’m open to some unbiased evidence for it.
 
DaleB said:
We’ve all seen/heard/read that kind of craziness. What we’ve never seen, to my knowledge, is a credible explanation of exactly HOW that money got allocated. I’d love it if we could just track down exactly who allocated or approved those kinds of expenditures so those people could be fired. Do that a few dozen times, get the message out that government money needs to be spent for the actual benefit the US or you’ll be looking for a new job, and I think at least some of the problem would solve itself.
Click to expand...

As I said, its something we can all agree needs to stop. The problem is the sheer size of the government bureaucracy. These things get slipped into multi-thousand page omnibus bills that no one could ever possibly read every line. What's $200,000 here or there in a multi-trillion dollar package. Its not even a rounding error. I was once involved in a conversation with a certain Senator, and concern was being expressed about a multi-million dollar program important to our operation. We were assured by said Senator not to worry, because Congress doesn't really spend much time sweating anything under a billion dollars, they just don't have the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top