DOGE and the FAA

[Silvaire]

How many departments have you seen eliminated?

It's not a "Department" Congress are the ones who can create those.

 

[3393RP]

I briefly worked for the State of Texas for the Medicare IG. THAT was spartan. I attended a conference to represent the office and couldn’t stay in the hotel where the conference was (a nice but by no means extravagant place the Air Force would definitely have covered). Instead they put me up in a threadbare Super 8-level place.

I'm quite happy with the manner in which Texas spends my tax dollars. The Federal government, beginning with Congress, not at all.

 

[Llewtrah381]

I'm quite happy with the manner in which Texas spends my tax dollars. The Federal government, beginning with Congress, not at all.

I’d probably lock the thread with comments about Operation Lone Star and its real motives….

 

[3393RP]

I’d probably lock the thread with comments about Operation Lone Star and its real motives….

Yeah, because then I could discuss the impact to the border cities by millions of tourists passing through.

 

[Llewtrah381]

I'm quite happy with the manner in which Texas spends my tax dollars. The Federal government, beginning with Congress, not at all.

Add: here’s why I left the role there within a short period. This guy was bad juju. He took a lot of people down with him, too - some very talented, some just toadys.

The story behind Jack Stick’s rise to power

If Jack Stick could be any animal, he would be a liger. A cross-breed between a lion and a tiger might seem like a whimsical answer to the question posed in the 2011 job interview, just before he w…

www.statesman.com

 

[Randomskylane]

Before we get all breathless, let 's take a step back and get some perspective. The US is a $30 trillion economy. Of course you would expect debt levels to increase over time, just as the debt level of ATT is much larger now than it was on 1950. However, having said that, how out of line are we today as compared to historical levels of spending? A couple charts:View attachment 135266View attachment 135267

The sky isn't falling, and Covid notwithstanding the percentages are pretty much in line with when we thought there was some semblance of fiscal sanity. Any reasonable economist would ask if changes at the revenue and spending margins to get back to historically acceptable levels would be preferable to the disruption and costs of burning it all down.

These historical numbers would be quite different if the us dollar was no longer the world’s reserve currency, yes?

Borrowing a trillion quarterly for interest expense only may not be sustainable?

Printing a trillion dollars because no one will lend it to us might also change things?

Other nations are already using non US dollars in their trade, etc

I bet that we need to factor many other things as well

 

[Randomskylane]

Back to FAA and DOGE. One point of maybe success is the airport review process. I have gone through three of them, and all were done by private contractors, worked for the FAA in the inspection biz. In all three cases, the inspector was on time, and spent the right amount of time at the field, and discussed the right kind of stuff. They do a master record review of the data there, and then we do our walk about and see what can be improved, and what is ok as is. There was no pressure to 'red X' any feature, or attempt to shut down ops at the airport. There were a few suggestions and we chatted about how to make it better at a reasonable cost.

I consider the time spent, and the work done to be of value, however I don't know what the private guy charges the FAA for an inspection. I received a written report after the job was done, and the master records were updated within 2 cycles.

There are places where the FAA is doing things right. I also consider the Lockheed takeover of most FSS services to be moderately efficient. They don't like it that I don't have an 'account' and I make a point of asking each time if an account is required to operate in the Natl Airspace System. Of course, it is not. Then I get my standard briefing, ignore all the NOTAMs and go about my flight.

I'm sure there is money to be saved at the FAA, but it's a pimple on the ass of many other federal operations that can see massive improvements in efficiency. Sad about the FSDO office staffing and empty buildings. One thing that could go a long way for DOGE to improve is provide a user public interface where the people of the nation could report stuff like the empty acres of FSDO office space. That stuff is on a lease, most likely annual and would be an easy target to just send a notice to quit at the end of the lease. These kinds of things are done in the biz world constantly, but I'm sure in the FAA way, there are 30 meetings, and 18 sessions, with 74 people to decide to close down one leased building, so it never gets done.

a friend used to work at gsa, which manages real estate for the government. Large leases take several years before a move can happen.

Year to decide what is needed, a year to get a lease, a year for design, and another for construction. So, politics aside, new administration will be out before any downsizing to Iowa or whatever can occur.

Now, add in politics-example the agency may need to negotiate the new space requirements with the various unions.

Example- one party is claiming reduction in rent by mothballing buildings while the other is insisting fed workers go back to the office. How do they do that after the downsizing? You can’t stack two people on a desk simultaneously. Are we supposed to think that encouraged retirements are going to magically coincide with space reduction?

Example- both parties are pushing back to the office but it’s terrible for the environment (in cities) to have ten (50? Who knows) thousand cars idling for two hours a day in traffic. Claiming to be green is ridiculous, just like claiming credit for lease cost reduction while spending hundreds of millions to move locations

-there are building usage and many other calculations to argue over

Let’s say Doge can issue answers to every question on February first, it’ll still take a decade for impact (let’s say current leases don’t expire for an average of five years plus the time listed above)

He said a lot more but that’s the gist

 

[Chip Sylverne]

These historical numbers would be quite different if the us dollar was no longer the world’s reserve currency, yes?

Borrowing a trillion quarterly for interest expense only may not be sustainable?

Printing a trillion dollars because no one will lend it to us might also change things?

Other nations are already using non US dollars in their trade, etc

I bet that we need to factor many other things as well

The USD is the world's reserve currency not by decree, but because we are the world's larges economy, by far. Even the BRIC total falls short. The only reason other countriesare trading in Yuan is that they are shut out of SWIFT for ( in my opinion) very valid reasons. The nearest to us is China, but even they are $10 trillion short and have very weak legal protections on property. Do you really see a mass movement away from the dollar any time soon?

I don't mean to suggest we should continue to spend at the rate we are, but spending and revenue changes should and can be made without, as Musk put it, "a great deal of short-term pain".

And just as point of fact, last quarter's interest on the debt was $1.1 billion. A $ trillion quarterly is a long way off.

 

[martym]

Creating a bureaucracy to eliminate gov. waste is a failure right out of the gate.

 

[Llewtrah381]

Creating a bureaucracy to eliminate gov. waste is a failure right out of the gate.

You’re skeptical of the Department of Redundancy Department?

 

[wanttaja]

Returning to the basic question, does anyone know Musk's attitude towards recreational aviation? We know he's in favor of "General Aviation", but what about personal flight below the bizjet level?

Remember that limits on personal aviation are likely to have popular support...after all, we're dangerous and crash on people.

Remember, too, that there is a simple way to reduce the FAA's bite on the federal budget: User fees. Cut the budget by 25%, and require the FAA to make it up by charging for currently-free services. This could easily be spun as a positive, to the general populace. "Make those fat-cat airplane owners pay!" Musk won't mind paying $50 landing fees, won't affect him.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

"Elon Musk's new Department of Government Efficiency posted a job listing saying they are looking for people willing to work eighty-plus hours a week for no money. You can't be surprised that the White African guy's first idea is slavery."

- Michael Che, "Weekend Update", 11/16/2024

Ron Wanttaja

 

[TCABM]

"Elon Musk's new Department of Government Efficiency posted a job listing saying they are looking for people willing to work eighty-plus hours a week for no money. You can't be surprised that the White African guy's first idea is slavery."

- Michael Che, "Weekend Update", 11/16/2024

Ron Wanttaja

I don’t work 80hr weeks no matter the money.

 

[NoBShere]

I thought the way you fixed a budget was to assign a financial task to all budget owners that collectively gets you to the desired budget. This puts the decisions with the people who should have knowledge of the activities of the department so that department functions are properly completed and budgets are met. If they don't meet the task, then they get replaced with new leaders. I was unaware there was any other way to do it. Hiring more people seems like a step in the wrong direction. In other words, do your job or get replaced.

 

[Bell206]

I seriously doubt DoGE will make it down to the FAA level let alone the DoT. They’ll be lucky enough to finish with the EPA, IRS, DoD, DoHS and DoEd before its sunset date of July 4 2026.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Returning to the basic question, does anyone know Musk's attitude towards recreational aviation? We know he's in favor of "General Aviation", but what about personal flight below the bizjet level?

I can't say for sure, but I suspect it's mixed.

On the one hand, he has a track record of ruthless cost cutting in business. User fees could be an easy target.

On the other hand, he's all about innovation, and he has been outspoken about the FAA regulatory environment as an inhibitor. That was in the context of space flight, but I can see him coming in with a generalized bias towards opening things up.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I seriously doubt DoGE will make it down to the FAA level let alone the DoT. They’ll be lucky enough to finish with the EPA, IRS, DoD, DoHS and DoEd before its sunset date of July 4 2026.

Musk has been pretty vocal about the FAA being in his crosshairs.

SpaceX's Elon Musk calls on FAA chief to resign

SpaceX continues to bristle at U.S. government oversight.

www.space.com

 

[wanttaja]

I don’t work 80hr weeks no matter the money.

Actually, it reminds of the "Dollar a year men," in the first half of the 20th century and especially during the World Wars. Nothing in the historical record about hours actually put in on the job.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Warmi]

"Elon Musk's new Department of Government Efficiency posted a job listing saying they are looking for people willing to work eighty-plus hours a week for no money. You can't be surprised that the White African guy's first idea is slavery."

- Michael Che, "Weekend Update", 11/16/2024

Ron Wanttaja

Even that joke is historically inaccurate as vast majority of slaves were sold to European traders by other black Africans.

 

[Warmi]

I seriously doubt DoGE will make it down to the FAA level let alone the DoT. They’ll be lucky enough to finish with the EPA, IRS, DoD, DoHS and DoEd before its sunset date of July 4 2026.

Thats pretty much what they said ..starting with DOD and few other agencies ( not including FAA )

 

[wanttaja]

Even that joke is historically inaccurate as vast majority of slaves were sold to European traders by other black Africans.

So fact-checking politicians is frowned upon, and all jokes have to be historically accurate? Lemme make a note of that....

Ron "How did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" Wanttaja

 

[172andyou]

So fact-checking politicians is frowned upon, and all jokes have to be historically accurate? Lemme make a note of that....

Worse, the joke is historically accurate. Slavery was a thing in south africa and then they kept oppression around longer than most nations via apartheid. The joke works. That other people did bad stuff also doesn't change that. So, even by the "comedy only works on a foundation of truth" rule, the joke still works.

 

[Barrett50]

Musk has been pretty vocal about the FAA being in his crosshairs.

SpaceX's Elon Musk calls on FAA chief to resign

SpaceX continues to bristle at U.S. government oversight.

www.space.com

From my reading of the tea leaves, Musk's anger and frustration with the FAA dealt with delays, and picayune attitude of the 'crats he has to deal with to get a launch 'permit'. Prior to his move to buy X(and move to the right) all his requests for permits went through slick as corn through a goose. But - suddenly last summer/fall his permits for launches seemed to be slow walked, and very detailed investigation of every aspect of the launch unlike his previous relationship with NASA and FAA.

Advising that the FAA admin step down is related to his anti-right stance as it presents to Space-X. Not to the waste and inefficiency of the FAA.

 

[Warmi]

So fact-checking politicians is frowned upon, and all jokes have to be historically accurate? Lemme make a note of that....

Ron "How did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" Wanttaja

It is not really about fact checking…. more like , for a joke to be truly funny it has to be somewhat based in reality , thats what makes it funny in the first place.

 

[Bell206]

Musk has been pretty vocal about the FAA being in his crosshairs.

Different battle and outside the purview of the DoGE from what has been discussed publicly. However, the person who will probably look into the SpaceX thing and possibly the Tesla thing will be whoever gets selected as DoT Sec. Same with the new boss at the FCC and the Starlink issue for the rural internet fiasco. But on the SpaceX side, he has more issues with the EPA and his Boca Chica neighbors than the FAA.

 

[Warmi]

From my reading of the tea leaves, Musk's anger and frustration with the FAA dealt with delays, and picayune attitude of the 'crats he has to deal with to get a launch 'permit'. Prior to his move to buy X(and move to the right) all his requests for permits went through slick as corn through a goose. But - suddenly last summer/fall his permits for launches seemed to be slow walked, and very detailed investigation of every aspect of the launch unlike his previous relationship with NASA and FAA.

Advising that the FAA admin step down is related to his anti-right stance as it presents to Space-X. Not to the waste and inefficiency of the FAA.

First of all X has not moved to right or to left, it is still a public platform - it is just that no longer “moderates” ( or censors ) posts unless these happen to break the law.
As far as the FAA … I am sure there is a lot of waste and inefficiencies there - in any institution where it takes an act of God to get somebody fired and generally there is no correlation between performance and continued employment - even if every , say 4th , new hire turns out to be useless dead weight , eventually over time you will accumulate enough of dead weight to make the whole organization suffer …

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Actually, it reminds of the "Dollar a year men," in the first half of the 20th century and especially during the World Wars. Nothing in the historical record about hours actually put in on the job.

Ron Wanttaja

If I recall, the $1 a year men were to help mobilize the government, not deconstruct it. And I don't think any had government contracts worth $18 billion.

 

[Chris Dickens]

I'll preface this by saying I spent nearly 30 years in the military and retired as an O-5 and worked around a lot of senior officers and DoD staff.

I think the main goal of DOGE isn't necessarily to remake how we do things on the ground level, but more focused on looking at the structure of agencies, overlapping areas of responsibility and to examine the deluge of middle- and senior-level government employees that often don't contribute to the proper execution of the agency's mission.

While I was in the military, I ran into a LOT of DoD civilian employees that had very limited job responsibilities but were being paid as GS-11, 12 or even 13 staff. The military itself, like many other bureaucracies, often created subordinate organizations with an eye on expanding "billets" for senior staff promotion opportunities. I saw this left and right during my time, and I saw similar issues with sister agencies I worked with (Dept of State, Dept of Transportation).

We often had inside jokes about some of these senior DoD civilian employees having job titles similar to "Assistant Deputy Aide to the Assistant." I saw plenty of SES (Senior Executive Service) and senior GS (General Schedule) employees with vague job titles and we often wondered "just what is it that you do around here."

With the politics of the era aside, I do feel that many of our government agencies are bloated, and I've seen plenty of cases of overlapping authorities and responsibilities. My hope is that DOGE spends more time identifying these kinds of inefficiencies, rather than focusing on how to re-do our National Airspace System, etc. And honestly, it would make sense that they would focus on that stuff and not the nuts-and-bolts aspects of how services are performed and/or paid for.

 

[Corin]

The US Government Accountability Office (gao dot gov) is an agency whose sole job is to find ways to make government more efficient and recommend it to Congress. For every $1 they are appropriated, they save us 133 dollars(averaged over the last 6 years), and if we had implemented all their recommendations, for every 1 dollar we would give to the GAO, we would get a greater than $200 return on our money.

You can sort by their agency recommendations at (www dot gao dot gov/reports-testimonies/recommendations-database ), to see what improvements they would like to see for different agencies. Anyway, I highly recommend sorting by FAA priority suggestions.

Unless Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency is doing something different from GAO, they have no use. Considering Elon Musk is busy retweeting GAO suggestions(twitter dot com/elonmusk/status/1858266013197885723 ), I don't think Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency will produce any actual results, and instead will just pretend GAO suggestions are his own. Apologies for breaking the politics rule as my first post on this forum, but I think this assignment is just like how presidents will assign party members who they don't like to useless posts(such as assigning someone to be the ambassador of Ireland).

I think the main goal of DOGE isn't necessarily to remake how we do things on the ground level, but more focused on looking at the structure of agencies, overlapping areas of responsibility and to examine the deluge of middle- and senior-level government employees that often don't contribute to the proper execution of the agency's mission.

I don't disagree, but until Elon Musk starts coming up with original suggestions, instead of just reposting GAO's findings, I don't see him achieving anything.

 

[Baked Potato]

it is just that no longer “moderates” ( or censors ) posts unless these happen to break the law.

Well that's not true.

 

[Warmi]

Well that's not true.

It is .. a few journalists suspended for short time and then reinstated with apologies is not the same as hard ban on everyone who dares to express whatever is currently passing as so called misinformation.

X is currently the only large social platform that actually resembles the concept of the Internet as it was envisioned and implemented in the 90s and early 2000s and I am really glad it is here .

 

[Barrett50]

First of all X has not moved to right or to left, it is still a public platform - it is just that no longer “moderates” ( or censors ) posts unless these happen to break the law.
As far as the FAA … I am sure there is a lot of waste and inefficiencies there - in any institution where it takes an act of God to get somebody fired and generally there is no correlation between performance and continued employment - even if every , say 4th , new hire turns out to be useless dead weight , eventually over time you will accumulate enough of dead weight to make the whole organization suffer …

I'm sure you believe this. Meh - it's a semi free country.

 

[Barrett50]

I'll preface this by saying I spent nearly 30 years in the military and retired as an O-5 and worked around a lot of senior officers and DoD staff.

I think the main goal of DOGE isn't necessarily to remake how we do things on the ground level, but more focused on looking at the structure of agencies, overlapping areas of responsibility and to examine the deluge of middle- and senior-level government employees that often don't contribute to the proper execution of the agency's mission.

While I was in the military, I ran into a LOT of DoD civilian employees that had very limited job responsibilities but were being paid as GS-11, 12 or even 13 staff. The military itself, like many other bureaucracies, often created subordinate organizations with an eye on expanding "billets" for senior staff promotion opportunities. I saw this left and right during my time, and I saw similar issues with sister agencies I worked with (Dept of State, Dept of Transportation).

We often had inside jokes about some of these senior DoD civilian employees having job titles similar to "Assistant Deputy Aide to the Assistant." I saw plenty of SES (Senior Executive Service) and senior GS (General Schedule) employees with vague job titles and we often wondered "just what is it that you do around here."

With the politics of the era aside, I do feel that many of our government agencies are bloated, and I've seen plenty of cases of overlapping authorities and responsibilities. My hope is that DOGE spends more time identifying these kinds of inefficiencies, rather than focusing on how to re-do our National Airspace System, etc. And honestly, it would make sense that they would focus on that stuff and not the nuts-and-bolts aspects of how services are performed and/or paid for.

About 30 years ago, I spent 6mo as a GS-13 on a 'special project' that was going to revolutionize computer use in combat. There were about 9 of us all mostly standing around with our thumb in our ass for days/weeks on end while the project ramped up, alpha then beta test, then theoretical roll out to units. Back then a GS-13 made pretty good nickels, and my wife pleaded with me to stick it out(early in marriage). My career was stagnating, and the project was full of swiss cheese holes, and it never went anywhere. Even back then - I was amazed at how much money just the civ engineers were wasting with something that all of us knew down to our gonads was going no where ever.

I left after almost 6 mo, the project lingered on for another year, and finally everyone realized what a boondoggle it was, and would never work as designed. I stopped putting it on my resume it was such a stinker. Got a nice raise after getting out of that mess, and the wife eventually forgave me for leaving the Army gravy train. (she really liked the O club on base, cheap drinks, lots of activities, friends, and social stuff)

It looks to me like DOGE is aimed at things the exec can do right away to cut, and not bother with congress. Things in his direct control that can be cut HARD. DoD is a big, big target for this exec decision stuff.

 

[TCABM]

Want to see change? Limit each agency to three (3) political appointees and watch the Plum Book numbers drop to something manageable. For reference, there’s about 4000 political appointees in the federal government and 1,200 positions require Senate confirmation. A little more than 800 of those positions are filled right now with no intention of filling the remainder.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I agree here too yet with a different "spin". A student pilot shouldn't use a high performance single, or an airplane not certified for intentional spins, for his checkride. A DPE could tell instructors and students not to show up in a plane like that for a PP checkride.

There are a LOT of trainers that are not certified for intentional spins. Any of the taper-wing Cherokees, the Diamonds, SR20... Cessna trainers are but we shouldn't be requiring people to learn in a Cessna.

Yes, and some of us are saying they decided wrongly. Whatever plane a pilot is flying, shouldn’t the pilot become proficient enough to fly it at MCA? Won’t that create a safer pilot?

Not necessarily. The FAA decided that it wasn't really particularly smart to be teaching people to hang on the edge with the stall warning blaring. The correct habit to teach is to immediately begin stall recovery procedures without any thought or hesitation as soon as a stall is indicated.

The other question then becomes, what is the value of being very proficient at "real" slow flight? I'm not sure there is any. Probably easier discussed on the "Important aspects of flying ..." thread though... This one is probably gonna get locked eventually and has a lot of non-aviation content in it.

 

[Warmi]

There are a LOT of trainers that are not certified for intentional spins. Any of the taper-wing Cherokees, the Diamonds, SR20... Cessna trainers are but we shouldn't be requiring people to learn in a Cessna.

Not necessarily. The FAA decided that it wasn't really particularly smart to be teaching people to hang on the edge with the stall warning blaring. The correct habit to teach is to immediately begin stall recovery procedures without any thought or hesitation as soon as a stall is indicated.

The other question then becomes, what is the value of being very proficient at "real" slow flight? I'm not sure there is any. Probably easier discussed on the "Important aspects of flying ..." thread though... This one is probably gonna get locked eventually and has a lot of non-aviation content in it.

When your engine goes out and you need to put it down, knowing how to manage your glide and land it at the slowest possible speed without a stall is the main benefit of being proficient at a slow flight.

 

[Llewtrah381]

About 30 years ago, I spent 6mo as a GS-13 on a 'special project' that was going to revolutionize computer use in combat. There were about 9 of us all mostly standing around with our thumb in our ass for days/weeks on end while the project ramped up, alpha then beta test, then theoretical roll out to units. Back then a GS-13 made pretty good nickels, and my wife pleaded with me to stick it out(early in marriage). My career was stagnating, and the project was full of swiss cheese holes, and it never went anywhere. Even back then - I was amazed at how much money just the civ engineers were wasting with something that all of us knew down to our gonads was going no where ever.

I left after almost 6 mo, the project lingered on for another year, and finally everyone realized what a boondoggle it was, and would never work as designed. I stopped putting it on my resume it was such a stinker. Got a nice raise after getting out of that mess, and the wife eventually forgave me for leaving the Army gravy train. (she really liked the O club on base, cheap drinks, lots of activities, friends, and social stuff)

It looks to me like DOGE is aimed at things the exec can do right away to cut, and not bother with congress. Things in his direct control that can be cut HARD. DoD is a big, big target for this exec decision stuff.

I’m not sure if your story is about what DOGE could cut - or how DOGE itself will play out. I think there’s good odds for the latter, including people not wanting to put their time on DOGE on their resume. Kinda like some high-profile election stuff 8 years ago that suddenly went silent.

 

[Bob Noel]

....

It looks to me like DOGE is aimed at things the exec can do right away to cut, and not bother with congress. Things in his direct control that can be cut HARD. DoD is a big, big target for this exec decision stuff.

Low hanging fruit: drive-by fieldings by general officers and congressional pukes, and the civilian equivalents. Or what is known as a GOBI (General Officer Bright Idea).

A drive-by fielding is when the DoD is required to purchase a quantity of something (e.g., C-130J) and only the initial purchase price is funded. Not the mainenance, not the training, not the whole logistics tail.

A GOBI can result in staff pursuing a project/concept that makes no dang sense, by the general wanted it...

 

[farangutan]

One of the worst practices in my opinion is the idea or practice of using all of an allocated budget or lose it for next year. Wasteful spending incentivized.

 

[MRC01]

One of the worst practices in my opinion is the idea or practice of using all of an allocated budget or lose it for next year. Wasteful spending incentivized.

This also relates to budget baselines. Is the baseline for next year whatever you spent this year? If so, it exacerbates the use-it-or-lose-it situation and puts growth on autopilot. Or is the baseline for next year zero, and the org must (re)justify its purpose every year?

That said, the biggest problem with government spending growth is entitlements. They should be in-scope for DOGE, else they're missing the elephant in the room. Yet changes to entitlements require acts of congress (literally), which is darn near impossible.