thread closed

TSA rules seem to be capricious and spurious, (in my opinion) — that needs to stop.
It takes too long to find an available DPE to schedule a check ride.
Allow “Gold Seal” flight instructors to issue PPL‘s.
Allow “Gold Seal” CFII to issue Instrument ratings.
No age 67.
Double the time the FAA medical is valid for.
Increase the number of seats and weight of light sport aircraft eligible up to C172 size.
 
On the wild possibility that this is legit...

One of the few things left that the US is a world leader in is flight training. Because we have a lot of qualified instructors, and lots of small and large companies that offer flight training. So support them. Recognize that small airports offering flight training are an important part of the US economy, and support them. Protect them from local government regulation and influence, which can be influenced by a demand for the real estate for other purposes. Would we let the interstate highway system be compromised by local regulation? No. Or permit local regulations affecting railroads or navigable rivers? No. So let's protect the airports.

Along those lines, the people doing flight training are often small business people, sometimes just themselves, who are far from wealthy. For the training system to work, and the US to be a world leader in aviation, we need to continue to be the best place in the world to fly light planes. Not the elite, but regular people. Protecting that, by making sure larger airports can't use fees to keep out general aviation is important. Not saying it's a crisis, but to me it's as important to protect general aviation as it is to protect any other form of interstate commerce.

Ok, my soapbox. I don't have any interest in this other than being a guy that flies planes once in a while.
 
Prohibit the FAA from allowing the closure of grant receiver airports - agreements were made and must be followed. Create management takeover rules when public airport managers use abusive policies to reduce traffic to justify shutdowns. (Looking at you Santa Monica).

however, if you’re an intern for the subcommittee, you may or may not have access to members to lobby for these things.
 
Previous post says youre from MA. So if this is legit (and I'm skeptical at best) I'm assuming you'd be interning for Stephen F. Lynch. Who seems to only be in the subcommittee because of noise at BOS. So, first thing I'd do would be kick him out cuz surely there's someone in Congress with some minutiae of experience in an airplane besides being a passenger?
 
My wishlist would be:
-Replace 3rd class medicals with basic med
-protection and support for small airports
-allow expanded owner maintenence on non commercial light aircraft similar to what is allowed for experimentals, or perhaps a lower level mechanics certification valid only for an owned aircraft, similar to the lsa repairman

I'm not sure any of these would really move the needle for "the industry", but they would all certainly improve things for those of us participating in it.
 
Jim K said:
My wishlist would be:
-Replace 3rd class medicals with basic med
-protection and support for small airports
-allow expanded owner maintenence on non commercial light aircraft similar to what is allowed for experimentals, or perhaps a lower level mechanics certification valid only for an owned aircraft, similar to the lsa repairman
Click to expand...

That's a good list. Use that!
 
NorthEast Ohio said:
Double the time the FAA medical is valid for.
Increase the number of seats and weight of light sport aircraft eligible up to C172 size.
Click to expand...
Jim K said:
-Replace 3rd class medicals with basic med
Click to expand...

Given that there is no data that shows that either a third class medical or basic med have a statistically significant impact on safety (compared to no medical light sport), just plain eliminate them.
 
What does an intern do day-to-day for the subcommittee on aviation with the US House of Representatives? (Genuinely curious what a day in the life is like)
 
Last edited:
Now comes Debbie Downer (SNL ref)

What should you do? Keep your mouth shut, do what everyone in the office tells you to do because you have zero standing, zero input. Watch, learn, attempt to understand how convoluted Federal Government really is. Your job is to be a gofer. That’s all.

99% of the work is done by the staff, each with a major area of expertise, to solve constituient’s problems.

Have you looked at your rep’s website? That’s the bulk of the work, with VA, IRS and Social Security as the primary questions/problems that come in.

Subcommittee on Aviation? Be very nice to the lobbyists, it’s a potential job offer when your internship is over. Notice how much money is spent by A4A, and the airlines and Boeing. Garmin, too. NBAA spends, too. But spam-can GA is and always will be the poor step child because we don’t have the money which is clout, regardless what AOPA and EAA claim, so we ride NBAA coat tails and hope for the best.

If, in the unlikely event someone asks, point out that GA is an economic driver, critical in rural areas for transportation, critical for emergency management (fires in the west), agriculture, etc. Get a copy of your state’s DOT report on economic impact of aviation and memorize it, paying attention to everything that’s not Class B. Every state issues this report periodically.

Other than that, have fun!
 
Jim K said:
-allow expanded owner maintenence on non commercial light aircraft
Click to expand...
FYI: it needs to also include a viable path to return the aircraft to pre-Owner Mx state along with part tracking from these aircraft. This was one of the big issues why Primary Non-Commercial failed here and as I understand why the TCCA Owner Mx category aircraft never achieved wide acceptance.
 
Going back to my comments about economic impact. Here's a very brief (!) summary for Colorado.

Whenever non-pilots complain about General Aviation and/or delays on commercial airlines, I suggest that they contact their state Dept of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics and get the latest Economic Impact report. The latest Colorado report is 2020.

Caveat: Denver International (DEN) is the 800# Gorilla. But it's only 1 of 74 airports in the state.
Of these, 14 provide Commercial Service, altho all but DEN are very happy to have spam-can GA activity. Of course Aspen and Vail have seasonal activity.

Statewide impact

Jobs: 345,700
"Jobs supported by the operation and development of airports, by off-airport air visitor spending, and by off- airport companies that rely on air cargo services to ship their goods."

Payroll: $16+ billion
Annual payroll associated with those jobs
Sidebar: consider the tax impact.

Value Added: $27 billion
Output or total annual economic activity which is comparable to the spending required to purchase goods and services to support operations for all activities

Business revenues: $49 Billion

Agriculture: Estimates of 28% of all cropland is treated by aerial applications. This eliminates "surface disruption" caused by tractors and other vehicles causing soil compaction and crop trampling. Estimates are 3-4% of total crop yield is lost to surface disruption. The estimated annual value protected by aerial application is $20 Million.

Percent of Economy supported by Aviation: 9% overall (jobs, payroll, etc)

Compare this with the aerospace industry, considered a "major" economic sector in Colorado (ref: 2018 34th Annual Space Symposium):

$15.4 billion in total output each year
55,430 workers in the aerospace cluster support an additional 135,450 workers in all industries throughout Colorado, bringing direct and indirect employment supported by the aerospace cluster to 190,880 workers.

So far, Aviation wins over Aerospace.

Note to OP: Have the same numbers for your state memorized and ready to go. If really involved, get the corresponding numbers for the entire US from the FAA (or possibly GAO). Money talks. Money is the only topic in Government.
 
Lindberg said:
Do you mean "immunize"? The government indemnifying--being financially responsible for--physicians would likely have the effect of increasing, rather than decreasing, lawsuits.
Click to expand...
Corrected; thanks!
 
Establish and fund a working group in the FAA for the sole purpose of testing 747s taking off from conveyor belts.
 
The big issue is pilots...and where they're coming from.

Most people don't realize that the majority of airline pilots DON'T come from the military. They come from the little airports, flying the little planes as trainers. Last I heard, about 2/3rds of airline pilots come from General Aviation, not the military. This isn't the 1950s, with hundreds of thousands of wartime pilots available.

Without those little airports, without those little trainers, the supply of pilots to the airlines starts to dry up. The airlines will then be forced to train pilots from scratch...and of course, the cost of this will be passed to the consumer. Remember, due to Congressional pressure, airline pilots must have 1500 hours of flight time. That 1500 hours has to be gained...somewhere. Cue the little airports, and the little planes again.

Most of the smaller commuter airlines can't afford to train their own pilots from scratch. So the number of flights will decrease, and air fares will go up, impacting both business and personal travel. The future availability of pilots will have a major impact on the economy and lifestyle in the US.

THAT'S what Congress needs to look at: Keeping the airlines viable by ensuring pilots are available.

And the only way to do that is to foster a strong General Aviation.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
The big issue is pilots...and where they're coming from.

Most people don't realize that the majority of airline pilots DON'T come from the military. They come from the little airports, flying the little planes as trainers. Last I heard, about 2/3rds of airline pilots come from General Aviation, not the military. This isn't the 1950s, with hundreds of thousands of wartime pilots available.

Without those little airports, without those little trainers, the supply of pilots to the airlines starts to dry up. The airlines will then be forced to train pilots from scratch...and of course, the cost of this will be passed to the consumer. Remember, due to Congressional pressure, airline pilots must have 1500 hours of flight time. That 1500 hours has to be gained...somewhere. Cue the little airports, and the little planes again.

Most of the smaller commuter airlines can't afford to train their own pilots from scratch. So the number of flights will decrease, and air fares will go up, impacting both business and personal travel. The future availability of pilots will have a major impact on the economy and lifestyle in the US.

THAT'S what Congress needs to look at: Keeping the airlines viable by ensuring pilots are available.

And the only way to do that is to foster a strong General Aviation.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
Yay! I've been trying to make this point off-and-on, but without the data that you have provided to back it up. Thanks!
 
donjohnston said:
Am I missing something here?

Since when do interns have any input on... anything? I thought the only things that interns do is print things out, make copies and get coffee?
Click to expand...
REALLY??? Monica Lewinsky might have a different perspective on the subject. ;)
 
donjohnston said:
Am I missing something here?

Since when do interns have any input on... anything? I thought the only things that interns do is print things out, make copies and get coffee?
Click to expand...

It depends on the organization, but anyone working with interns should at least listen to what they have to say.

Years back, I had a patent application prepared, just listing me and an intern who had been working with me as the inventors. Our patent department ultimately decided not to pursue it (we traded the technology to a vendor in a mutually-beneficial way), but that was a fine example of the value of a good intern.
 
donjohnston said:
Since when do interns have any input on... anything? I thought the only things that interns do is print things out, make copies and get coffee?
Click to expand...
If that is all an intern does, there is something wrong with the company / management.

When I worked for a living, I always put interns to work on real projects.
Now, my students intern at a lot of different companies and they are doing real engineering work.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
If that is all an intern does, there is something wrong with the company / management.

When I worked for a living, I always put interns to work on real projects.
Now, my students intern at a lot of different companies and they are doing real engineering work.
Click to expand...
I guess you missed the part where this was the federal government.
 
donjohnston said:
I guess you missed the part where this was the federal government.
Click to expand...
I've not worked for the FAA or for Congress, but I have for a handful of various other agencies. The interns I've seen have been tasked with real projects. The federal employees responsible for supervising them tend to have tons of work on their desk, and the extra hands/knowledge are readily put to work. The interns with whom I have direct experience were pretty bright college students studying the particular field that the agencies are specialized in.
 
Jim K said:
…
-allow expanded owner maintenence on non commercial light aircraft similar to what is allowed for experimentals, or perhaps a lower level mechanics certification valid only for an owned aircraft, similar to the lsa repairman

I'm not sure any of these would really move the needle for "the industry", but they would all certainly improve things for those of us participating in it.
Click to expand...

Eh, I’d prefer an LSA repairman and LSA inspection type certificate for aircraft eligible to be operated under BasicMed.

I should probably refine my idea so it makes more sense and isn’t as bourbon infused.
 
I dunno… start by making the FAA follow THEIR OWN regulations?

Then have them follow the other federal regulations.

Go from there…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top