Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

"Major" vs. "minor"

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:44 am Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

 	  Quote: 	
		  

The problem is, there is no competition for the government. It

operates outside the laws of economics. I cannot switch my taxes to a

competitive government agency that does better work for me as I can

with businesses producing products.


	


   Correct. No consumer/supplier relationship . . . and no warranty

   either.  We are not permitted to seek and accept or reject

   the 'service' nor are we blessed with the conditions that

   permit us to get our money back when the service is not as

   advertised.



   Bob . . .

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:02 am Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

OK, but this is a government "of, by, and for the people".  We are 

the people.  Do we have to let this happen around us with no resistance?

That's why I think (as distasteful as it is to me), we need to do 

something like Ralph Nader did, when he turned SAFETY into an issue 

that forced the government to make all sorts of changes.  It turned 

out his "safety" issue was a complete lie and fabrication, and the 

Corvair was completely innocent of all charges, but he was able 

nonetheless to use that technique to do in a matter of a year or two 

what nobody had been able to do before: fight city hall.

How could that be translated into the aviation world?  How many 

members do AOPA and EAA have combined?

Dave Morris

At 08:41 AM 8/12/2006, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

<nuckollsr(at)cox.net>

>

>The problem is, there is no competition for the government. It

>operates outside the laws of economics. I cannot switch my taxes to a

>competitive government agency that does better work for me as I can

>with businesses producing products.

   Correct. No consumer/supplier relationship . . . and no warranty

   either.  We are not permitted to seek and accept or reject

   the 'service' nor are we blessed with the conditions that

   permit us to get our money back when the service is not as

   advertised.

   Bob . . .

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:32 am Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

At 11:08 AM 8/11/2006 -0500, you wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



December 17, 2006 - Kitty Hawk



Today over 6,000 aircraft owners collectively defied the Federal Aviation 

Administration by installing a jumper across their avionics master 

switches.  Sven Von Berg, leader of the revolt, stated "The Avionics 

Master switch is an antiquated concept that provides a single point of 

failure for the entire radio system.  We cannot continue to abide by rules 

that make our aircraft unsafe, and the FAA won't do anything about it."




	


   <snip>



 	  Quote: 	
		  In an unrelated story, a pilot was prevented from flying his wooden 

airplane today during celebrations at Kitty Hawk, because his 3rd Class 

Medical had expired a few days prior.  "It's not safe for him to fly 

today.  Last week it would have been safe", said Whiplash.


	


   An interesting thing to contemplate but consider that

   bureaucracies are like big marsh mellows. You can walk

   up and deliver a decidedly satisfying punch . . . perhaps

   penetrating all the way up to the elbow. But walk away

   and the 'wound' slowly recovers to repair the damage

   you thought you delivered.



   Take the boat-LORAN phenomenon of some years ago. FAA

   was real excited in a regulatory sort of way when they

   discovered that owners were hanging marine LORAN receivers

   in their airplanes and getting useful performance that

   left their esteemed VOR/DME in the dust. Did they do a mass

   roundup and wholesale prosecution of those who demonstrated

   displeasure by a public defiance of the rules?



   No problemo . . . they threw up a few inexpensive

   transmitters in the mountains and formalized the

   requirements for aircraft LORAN and did an end run

   on the folks who thought they'd delivered a real

   blow to the FAA marsh mellow. At the same time, they

   expanded their domain of "good and necessary

   services for the public welfare". The $600 boat

   LORAN was bureaucratically 'obsoleted' by a $2000

   'certified' product.



   If 6,000 owner's bypassed their avionics master

   switch, the FAA could easily issue an advisory

   circular that formalized the activity and then required

   that 337's be executed and filed for each mod.

   The aviation community might even be fooled into

   believing they pulled off a victory. Instead, a

   whole army of bureaucrats would have put yet

   another hand into the public wallet.



   The only way to end a no-value added activity

   is to cut off its source of energy. I.e, it needs

   to be eliminated in its entirety. Like forest

   fires and crab grass (prune a little here,

   poison a little there) you cannot allow remnants

   from which the antagonist returns. Further, just like

   organisms that are becoming increasingly resistant

   to antibiotics, bureaucracies that are badly

   injured but not dispatched come back in more

   virulent forms. The parasitic human is much more

   adaptive than plants and bacteria . . .



   Civil disobedience and widely publicized "revolts"

   have a certain allure but like all forms of

   conflict . . . peace comes only after victory and

   defeat and never by reconciliation and compromise.

   Successful bureaucrats are masters of the techniques

   of survival . . . either by total domination (YOUR defeat)

   or finesse (compromise, mostly in their favor . . . a

   slight wound but quickly healed).



   I recall a scene in "Gandi" where Mahatma Gandhi was

   sitting at a table of British bureaucrats and the

   head cheese was inquiring of Gandi as to how they might

   reach some kind of agreement (i.e. compromise). Gandi

   replied that compromise was not possible and the only

   recourse for the British was to simply leave.



   Our brothers in the TC aircraft world are fully engulfed

   by the tendrils and roots of the prevailing "public

   welfare". Short of a good dose of Roundup to eliminate

   the problem in it's entirety, the best we can hope for

   in the OBAM aviation world is to whack off those

   "runners" any time we catch one crossing the

   edge of the garden. But protection from intrusion

   on our craft is not enough. We're obliged to operate

   in an environment that is beyond our ability to

   influence. We may find ourselves in complete command

   of the best aircraft ever built but allowed only to

   operate in "uncontrolled airspace" at or below 700'

   AGL. Seems silly to contemplate . . . but there's

   absolutely nothing in the honorable citizen's bag of

   tricks (beyond the election of intelligent and honorable

   legislators) to keep such a thing from coming to pass . . .



   Bob . . .

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:45 am Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

At 09:00 AM 8/12/2006 -0500, you wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



OK, but this is a government "of, by, and for the people".  We are the 

people.  Do we have to let this happen around us with no resistance?



That's why I think (as distasteful as it is to me), we need to do 

something like Ralph Nader did, when he turned SAFETY into an issue that 

forced the government to make all sorts of changes.  It turned out his 

"safety" issue was a complete lie and fabrication, and the Corvair was 

completely innocent of all charges, but he was able nonetheless to use 

that technique to do in a matter of a year or two what nobody had been 

able to do before: fight city hall.



How could that be translated into the aviation world?  How many members do 

AOPA and EAA have combined?



Dave Morris


	


   There is no magnitude of public pressure that

   will produced the results you seek. Yes, uncle

   Ralph had an influence . . . but was it positive?

   It's public outcry like Ralph's that prompted the

   formation of yet more  bureaucracy that ultimately

   costs us money but still guarantees nothing.



   If Ralph had instead concentrated on remedies in

   the marketplace to illuminate and explain the

   design deficiencies in a product, the educated consumer

   would avoid the product and it would have died for

   lack of customers. Remedies for the injured were already

   in place within the legal system.  But the easy route

   is to persuade a majority of legislators and a president

   that some new law is a solution to a problem.



   I'm sure Mr. Nader believes (as do many of his

   devotees) that his efforts produced a good and valuable

   activity. But if one studies the economics of the

   results of his actions, we're almost certain to find

   that return on investment (dollars spent for lives

   "saved") cannot be calculated . . . yet EVERY politician

   is ready to expand a publicly financed activity in

   the interest of "safety" but without a single tool

   to know if the expenditure has real benefits to

   the consumer. Suppler/consumer relationships are self

   regulating as long as there is no force or fraud.

   It's much easier and less expensive to investigate

   and expose fraud than to legislate, enforce, adjudicate

   and punish fraud. But the former creates no bureaucracies

   and the later births and feeds many.



   Bob . . .

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:57 am Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

On Aug 12, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Dave N6030X wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <N6030X(at)DaveMorris.com>



 OK, but this is a government "of, by, and for the people".  We are  

 the people.  Do we have to let this happen around us with no  

 resistance?


	


I guess that depends on you.



 	  Quote: 	
		   That's why I think (as distasteful as it is to me), we need to do  

 something like Ralph Nader did, when he turned SAFETY into an issue  

 that forced the government to make all sorts of changes.  It turned  

 out his "safety" issue was a complete lie and fabrication, and the  

 Corvair was completely innocent of all charges, but he was able  

 nonetheless to use that technique to do in a matter of a year or  

 two what nobody had been able to do before: fight city hall.


	


So the ends justifies the means?



 	  Quote: 	
		   How could that be translated into the aviation world?  How many  

 members do AOPA and EAA have combined?


	


The government is a nasty opponent. How many people are prepared for  

the hell all the government agencies could make of their life? I  

would expect the "hoovering" to cross agency boundaries. You would  

*start* with losing your ticket with the FAA using the justification  

of "dangerous and reckless". You can then expect someone to tip off  

BATF that you have illegal firearms. Someone would tip off the FBI  

that you are a terrorist. Throw in an IRS audit. EPA would discover  

that your business is alleged to have dumped toxic waste and is now  

liable for the clean-up. Child protective services will hear rumors  

that you are sexually abusing your children so they will have to  

investigate. DEA will confiscate your aircraft because they have a  

tip from a reliable source that you have been running drugs. Need I  

go on?



None of this stuff has to actually be true; only the initial  

accusation is needed to start the investigatory process. The concept  

of "innocent until proven guilty" applies in criminal law but seems  

to have been forgotten in administrative law. Sure you can go to  

court and fight all of these things. You will probably be exonerated.  

You will probably get your property and children back. But since your  

adversary will have been the government, don't expect to get any  

awards for your costs. Are you prepared to bear the brunt of the  

costs yourself?



And the funny thing is, the people involved in these agencies will  

actually believe that what they are doing is in the best interests of  

the people they are protecting. Almost none of them will harbor any  

ill feelings toward you. They are just doing their jobs. These are  

the jobs and rules that were created by the agencies that were  

created by the laws passed by the representatives that you elected.  

So you are are getting government "of, by, and for the people".



So how are you going to fight it?



Sure if you could get *all* the pilots to participate it would  

probably work but most people are just going to go along to get  

along. There are even those who think that the government is good and  

right. So you will never get 100% buy-in. And there are those who  

will look at the potential and say, "not me, it just isn't that bad."  

Who's left?



I agree with your sentiments. I just think we may be too late to do  

anything about it. We fight our little skirmishes and hope we will be  

allowed to continue to fly and live the lives we seek to live, more  

or less in peace. I don't want to think about the alternatives right  

now.



Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

klehman(at)albedo.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: "Major" vs. "minor"

Just to cheer you guys up a bit, there are at least some intelligent 

folks in the FAA that do understand the bigger picture.



Consider the policy on flying Canadian homebuilts in US airspace.



 The FAA website says:

"From the FAA's standpoint, manpower and budgetary resources required 

for the process of completing the appropriate forms, issuing 

authorizations and keeping and maintaining records exceeds the safety 

benefits, if any, realized....."



therefore (my words now) download this letter, put it in your logbook, 

and fly in the USA subject to the listed conditions until further notice 

is issued..



A most impressive and enlightened position IMO. Hopefully the person 

responsible is rising through the ranks quickly 

Ken



snip



 	  Quote: 	
		     The only way to end a no-value added activity

   is to cut off its source of energy. I.e, it needs

   to be eliminated in its entirety. Like forest

   fires and crab grass (prune a little here,

   poison a little there) you cannot allow remnants

   from which the antagonist returns.

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum