X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 21:14:44 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.10) with ESMTP id 3289013 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:47:37 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.81; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from aarprv06.charter.net ([10.20.200.76]) by mta21.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.08.03.00 201-2186-126-20070710) with ESMTP id <20081113154702.HGGT3214.mta21.charter.net@aarprv06.charter.net> for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:47:02 -0500 Received: from axs ([75.132.241.174]) by aarprv06.charter.net with SMTP id <20081113154701.QTQX128.aarprv06.charter.net@axs> for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:47:01 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <3C03764A8B4A45B594988DB25DEBBCCA@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] The FAA compromises public safety X-Original-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:47:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D5_01C94574.C8B09B70" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Chzlrs: 0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01C94574.C8B09B70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Excellent, Bill. To hear the sweet voice of reason is so refreshing, in = the stifling atmosphere of 'feeling' and 'fear' this last decade. But, who said the FAA cares about their mandate, or for that matter, = their establishing legislation's statement oif Intent at the top of the = law... to promote aviation. In the 1960s there were 800,000 pilots and GenAv built some 15,000 light = planes. Now we have only abotu 600,000 pilots. This is 'promoting = aviation'? Who gets punished for this bad performance? In the 50s and 60s irports were busy, fun places until the early 70s. = Now they have Security fences, and everyone is afraid... mostly of = Homeland Secrurity, which some liken to the Gestapo... for those of us = old enough to remember the Gestapo. We had just done WWII to kill the = Gestapo. After WWII the FAA had good old boys seasoned by = self-sacrifice of the common good, to care about others, at least as = much as about their own careers. N ot many of them left. Then the GenAv market crashed in the 1970s, killoing my little company. = The lawyers and illogical courts suppressed GenAv for about two decades, = and the regulations started a-building. Without new airplanes and = pilots to work on the FAA lawyers kept busy. Even though the law said = no more regulations unless the EVIDENCE OF SAFETY demanded it. Well, we = got biennials anyway, ignorign protests of no safety need. The = military grabbed more and more airspace, backed by pressures of the Cold = War. The FAA inspectors of new homebuilts got busier and busier as the = workload for commercial aviation increased, and FSDO personnel and = funding got cut. Inspectors took longer and longer to come around; With = the last Administrations our jobs, manufacturing and non-corporate gov't = functions got 'outsourced' which means we now have to pay not only FAA = salaries, but pay a second FAA-approved 'representative' hnundreds of = dollars for an inspection. The new DAR, who himself also has to comply = with more and new FAA regualtions, has to pay for 'training', as the = outsourced FAA DAR inspectors are now being required to be = quasi-type-inspectors knowlegable not only about workmanship, but also = about each type of construction -- ignoring the meaning of the word = "Experimental" for our category of aircraft. This Airworthiness Inspection is the same kind of job any AI or &E does = on every certified aircraft every year. Why to we need separate = Airworthiness inspectors for Experimentals. We are the creators, the = designers, an d only need our workmanshipo checked. It's not hard to = look ahead and see that soon the Experimentals -- which have contributed = the only fresh and improved lightplane designs in the last 50 years -- = Bede/Grumman/American , Cirrus, and now the Lancair/Cessna composites... = are beng regulated into non-creation. The FAA managers haven't understood that each Experimenter is willing to = risk his own money, his own time, adn even risk his own life, to improve = aviation for the People. Instead of beign policed we shoujld b e = rewarded, and helped, gradiously, by the employers of the FAA. It seems = like the FAA administrators are fearful. Afraid. It's the 'feeling' of = the times. They should suck it up, and help us. Thank us. We hope and pray a new Administration will cut FAA regulation, which of = course cannot be done without cutting some of the 40,000 lawyers -- more = than the number of pilots flying airplanes at any one time -- out of the = bureau, where they now justify their existence by writing too many nifty = but unjustified new rules. =20 That's what lawyers do... they create precedent. I know. My = grandfather, father, both brothers. one son, three first cousins, and = some miscellaneous nephews... are lawyers. I love them all, and they're = good guys. But that's LAW. The great example of it is the Legislature. = We have so many band-aid laws I don't think anybody knows how many... = if you count all the unrelated 'earmarks' snuck into biklls. Instead of = a new Legislature starting ouot by surveying the body of ;laws and = sifting out all the redundant ones, and then removing the obsolete ones, = befor making a single new one, they all run tino their houses clutching = a handfull of new bills, to pile on top of the mess. We need a check and balance on the LAW. It needs to bve gleaned, sifted, = cut.=20 We have to be mature, adult, and realize that Security/Risk needs to be = balanced by Freedom to take risk, to Improve things. Perfectr security is -- jail. We lack common sense in the Legislature. Instead we have 'feeling', and = posturing, and precedent, and a lot of BS. So.. sorry about that, this is just alot of "Ain't it Awful", if we = don't think of a way to clean ujp the body of laws, cut back the = Security, and reward those of us who risk our own money, time and lives = to try to improve things.=20 How about some reward, some acclaim, for what we've done, in aviation, = for all of us, for We, the People? How can we 'bell the cat'? Terrence From: Bill Hannahan=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 21:43 Subject: [LML] The FAA compromises public safety We live in a society that is centered on asphalt and concrete. = Observe the world from a thousand feet or so and notice that people = spend the vast majority of their lives close to or on roads.=20 Mentally strip away the cars, buildings and other objects = leaving only the people and you will see that humans cover a very small = fraction of the earth=A2s surface, except on asphalt and concrete. That = is why when small airplanes fall out of the sky they rarely kill people = on the ground. With a drivers license you can drive a 25,000 lb Winnebago on = packed freeways at 75 mph, surrounded by innocent people in vans, small = cars and motorcycles. Have a medical incapacitation and there is a very = good chance you will kill several of them. Assume a pilot is about to embark on a trip from LA to Oklahoma = City, and unknown to him, he is going to have a massive fatal stroke in = the next 24 hours. If he chooses to drive straight through he will have the stroke = while driving, with perhaps a 10% chance of killing an innocent person. If he fly=A2s a Lancair there is a 21% chance (5hrs/24hrs) he = will be flying when he has the stroke, and when the plane hits the = ground perhaps one chance in three hundred that an innocent person will = be killed, so one chance in 1,440 of an innocent death. If medical certification forces him out of the cockpit, risk to = the public increases 14,400%. We could debate the appropriate medical standards for driving a = car, but the medical standards for flying a light plane should be much = lower than those for driving. Anyone licensed to drive should be = encouraged to fly a light plane in the interest of public safety. Medical certification for flying light planes reduces public = safety in contradiction to the FAA=A2s mandate, and should be = eliminated. Regards, Bill Hannahan wfhannahan@yahoo.com To their credit aeromedical in Oklahoma City used = statistical data to make the age 40 rule change based on the average = person less likely to have an incapacitating event in their thirties. I = can tell you the system often does work to keep some people from flying = who shouldnt be for those they might bring along and those on the ground = below. I would like to see how they collected the data on those = accidents on pilots without their medical certificate. Accidents related = to medical issues are rare and we know how the data is collected on = those with medical certificates. Thanks for the stats on the pilot group. Makes the point = for everyone to have the proper training while getting the experience = needed. Keep em coming. I wouldnt think of flying without recurrent = proficiency training. Matt Miriani AME =20 =20 No virus found in this outgoing message Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (5.0.0.22 - 10.100.048). http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/ ------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01C94574.C8B09B70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Excellent, = Bill.  To hear=20 the sweet voice of reason is so refreshing, in the stifling atmosphere = of=20 'feeling' and 'fear' this last decade.
 
But, who said the = FAA cares=20 about their mandate, or for that matter, their establishing = legislation's=20 statement oif Intent at the top of the law... to promote = aviation.
 
In the 1960s there = were 800,000=20 pilots and GenAv built some 15,000 light planes.  Now we have only = abotu=20 600,000 pilots.  This is 'promoting aviation'? Who gets punished = for this=20 bad performance?
In the 50s and 60s = irports were=20 busy, fun places until the early 70s.  Now they have Security = fences, and=20 everyone is afraid...  mostly of Homeland Secrurity, which some = liken to=20 the Gestapo... for those of us old enough to remember the Gestapo.  = We had=20 just done WWII to kill the Gestapo.  After WWII the FAA had good = old boys=20 seasoned by self-sacrifice of the common good, to care about others, at = least as=20 much as about their own careers.  N ot many of them = left.
 
Then the GenAv = market crashed=20 in the 1970s, killoing my little company.  The lawyers and = illogical courts=20 suppressed GenAv for about two decades, and  the regulations = started=20 a-building.  Without new airplanes and pilots to work on the FAA = lawyers=20 kept busy.  Even though the law said no more regulations unless the = EVIDENCE OF SAFETY demanded it.  Well, we got biennials anyway, = ignorign=20 protests of no safety need.   The military grabbed more and = more=20 airspace, backed by pressures of the Cold War.  The FAA inspectors = of new=20 homebuilts got busier and busier as the workload for commercial aviation = increased, and FSDO personnel and funding got cut.  Inspectors took = longer=20 and longer to come around; With the last Administrations our jobs, = manufacturing=20 and non-corporate gov't functions got 'outsourced' which means we now = have to=20 pay not only FAA salaries, but pay a second FAA-approved = 'representative'=20 hnundreds of dollars for an inspection.  The new DAR, who himself = also has=20 to comply with more and new FAA regualtions, has to pay for 'training', = as=20 the outsourced FAA DAR inspectors are now being required to be = quasi-type-inspectors knowlegable not only about workmanship, but also = about=20 each type of construction -- ignoring the meaning of the word = "Experimental" for=20 our category of aircraft.
This Airworthiness=20 Inspection is the same kind of job any AI or &E does on every = certified=20 aircraft every year.  Why to we need separate Airworthiness = inspectors for=20 Experimentals.  We are the creators, the designers, an d only need = our=20 workmanshipo checked.  It's not hard to look ahead and see = that soon=20 the Experimentals -- which have contributed the only fresh and improved=20 lightplane designs in the last 50 years  -- Bede/Grumman/American , = Cirrus,=20 and now the Lancair/Cessna composites... are beng regulated into=20 non-creation.
The FAA managers = haven't=20 understood that each Experimenter is willing to risk his own money, his = own=20 time, adn even risk his own life, to improve aviation for the = People. =20 Instead of beign policed we shoujld b e rewarded, and helped, = gradiously,=20 by the employers of the FAA.  It seems like the FAA = administrators are=20 fearful.  Afraid.  It's the 'feeling' of the times. They = should suck=20 it up, and help us.  Thank us.
 
We hope and pray a = new=20 Administration will cut FAA regulation, which of course cannot be done = without=20 cutting some of the 40,000 lawyers -- more than the number of pilots = flying=20 airplanes at any one time -- out of the bureau, where they now justify = their=20 existence by writing too many nifty but unjustified new rules. =20
That's what lawyers = do... they=20 create precedent.  I know.  My grandfather, father, both = brothers. one=20 son, three first cousins, and some miscellaneous nephews... are = lawyers.  I=20 love them all, and they're good guys.  But that's LAW.  The = great=20 example of it is the Legislature.   We have so many band-aid = laws I=20 don't think anybody knows how many... if you count all the unrelated = 'earmarks'=20 snuck into biklls.  Instead of a new Legislature starting ouot by = surveying=20 the body of ;laws and sifting out all the redundant ones, and then = removing the=20 obsolete ones, befor making a single new one, they all run tino their = houses=20 clutching a handfull of new bills, to pile on top of the = mess.
We need a check and = balance on=20 the LAW. It needs to bve gleaned, sifted, cut. 
We have to be = mature, adult,=20 and realize that Security/Risk needs to be balanced by Freedom to take = risk, to=20 Improve things.
Perfectr security = is --=20 jail.
We lack common = sense in the=20 Legislature.  Instead we have 'feeling', and posturing, and = precedent, and=20 a lot of BS.
So.. sorry about = that, this is=20 just alot of "Ain't it Awful", if we don't think of a way to clean ujp = the body=20 of laws, cut back the Security, and reward those of us who risk our own = money,=20 time and lives to try to improve things. 
How about some = reward, some=20 acclaim, for what we've done, in aviation, for all of us, for We, the=20 People?
 How can we = 'bell the=20 cat'?
 
Terrence
 
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, = 2008=20 21:43
Subject: [LML] The FAA = compromises public=20 safety


We live in a society = that is=20 centered on asphalt and concrete. Observe the world from a = thousand feet=20 or so and notice that people spend the vast majority of their = lives=20 close to or on roads.

Mentally strip away = the cars,=20 buildings and other objects leaving only the people and you will = see=20 that humans cover a very small fraction of the earth=A2s = surface, except=20 on asphalt and concrete. That is why when small airplanes fall = out of=20 the sky they rarely kill people on the = ground.

With a drivers license = you can=20 drive a 25,000 lb=20 Winnebago on packed freeways at 75=20 mph, = surrounded by=20 innocent people in vans, small cars and motorcycles. Have a = medical=20 incapacitation and there is a very good chance you will kill = several of=20 them.

Assume a pilot is = about to embark=20 on a trip from LA to Oklahoma City, and unknown to him, he is going to have a = massive fatal=20 stroke in the next 24 hours.

If he chooses to drive = straight=20 through he will have the stroke while driving, with perhaps a = 10% chance=20 of killing an innocent person.

If =  he fly=A2s a=20 Lancair there is a 21% chance  (5hrs/24hrs) he = will be=20 flying when he has the stroke, and when the plane hits the = ground=20 perhaps  one chance in three hundred that an = innocent=20 person will be killed, so one chance in 1,440 of an innocent=20 death.

If medical = certification forces=20 him out of the cockpit, risk to the public increases=20 14,400%.

We could debate the = appropriate=20 medical standards for driving a car, but the medical standards = for=20 flying a light plane should be much lower than those for = driving. Anyone=20 licensed to drive should be encouraged to fly a light plane in = the=20 interest of public safety.

Medical certification = for flying=20 light planes reduces public safety in contradiction to the = FAA=A2s=20 mandate, and should be eliminated.


Regards,
Bill Hannahan



 
To their credit aeromedical in Oklahoma = City used=20 statistical data to make the age 40 rule change based on = the=20 average person less likely to have an incapacitating = event in=20 their thirties. I can tell you the system often does = work to=20 keep some people from flying who shouldnt be for those = they=20 might bring along and those on the ground below. I would = like to=20 see how they collected the data on those accidents on = pilots=20 without their medical certificate. Accidents related to = medical=20 issues are rare and we know how the data is collected on = those=20 with medical certificates.
 
Thanks for the stats on the pilot group. Makes the = point=20 for everyone to have the proper training while getting = the=20 experience needed. Keep em coming. I wouldnt think of = flying=20 without recurrent proficiency training.
 
Matt Miriani
=
AME





No virus found in this outgoing message
Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (5.0.0.22 - 10.100.048).
http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/
------=_NextPart_000_00D5_01C94574.C8B09B70--