 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dlm34077(at)q.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 4:22 pm Post subject: NTSB recommendations |
 |
|
Check you latest EAA email.
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2012/EAB_Study/index.html
The latest study is less about safety than increasing the bureaucracy of the FAA and extending its control/guidance over experimental aviation. When you look at the overall trend, the FAA is providing more regulation over fewer machines. The number of US airline aircraft is probably less than 10000 and the number of new certified production aircraft are decreasing. The number of new experimental aircraft licensed annually is increasing; many have avionics whose capability exceed anything but the major carriers. The FAA has no control over the military. What are they going to do with their employees?
Look at the recommendations; a new intrusion of the FAA into the experimental world. Anytime a report is required, you can bet it will be either "boiler plate" or revised numerous times and reviewed at multiple levels; most bureaucratic reviews cover months. The reason many persons fly experimental is that anytime one wants to "improve" a certified aircraft, there is the STC. To replace a solid hydraulic line with Stratoflex standard hose, a one time STC is required. How much paper is involved depends on the inspector involved. The experimental aircraft manufacturer can simply make minor improvements while major improvements take the aircraft back through a modified phase I; logbook entries and possibly a simple report to FAA may be required.
You can argue that better inspection procedures might improve experimental aircraft safety. The question is at what cost? Government's approach to most problems is to "not address the problem individuals" but instead "build a bigger fence". More rules and regulation might prevent some problems by driving everyone through a more rigorous regulatory process. It will still not keep any person from forfeiting their right to contribute to the gene pool. Every year there are individuals who, in spite of all regulations to the contrary, kill themselves in aircraft or weather that they are not qualified to fly. Fortunately almost all of these individuals do to themselves and their passengers rather than anyone on the ground. Statistically that is not hard to understand given the vastness of the country and the size of the aircraft.
You can see the trend also in the EAA; how many articles in Sport Aviation are written about experimental aircraft or by experimental aircraft builders? It seems many of the writers are FLYING or AOPA retreads writing about their experiences in certified aircraft.
As they say in the Middle East " Beware the camel's nose in the tent".
Retired
after a career with four of the largest bureaucracies in the world.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-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?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
