----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Roger, Let me first say that I may well owe you personally an apology. Obviously, we have never met. I agree with everything Ed Burkhead said in his response to your earlier post. On the other hand, aviation is vastly different than it was 34 years ago. The certification requirement changes since the days of the CAA had already killed commercial light plane design and manufacturing incentives, and the market could no longer justify such vastly increased expense. But in 1970 an aircraft owner, his mechanic, and a given representative of the FAA each respected the other's legitimate role. Each still, I believe, tried to maintain or advance aviation in their efforts with the others. The Ercoupe was designed with a Pet Milk can for a brake fluid reservoir and an automotive off-the-shelf fuel pump. It was designed to reduce the time necessary to solo, and to make the sky accessible to the average person of average means. Today what the plane costs is almost immaterial. Whether you keep it or fly it comes down to what it costs to keep it "airworthy". It ain't cheap. As someone most aptly put it, "If God had meant man to fly, he would have given him more money". A friend recently asked me about learning to fly, and I referred him to a local FBO. Instruction there (I didn't ask in what aircraft) is now $120.00 an hour. In the eighties when I learned to fly, one could take the Private Pilot check ride after 40 hours. That probably hasn't decreased. So for my friend, the minimum outlay to get a license is now $4,800. I personally believe a large percentage of that expense results from the increased markups an FBO much get to stay in business with an ever-decreasing number of potential customers. These markups go on top of components that are vastly too expensive to manufacture in this country under applicable rules and regulations, and that situation is self-perpetuating because such components may not be manufactured where labor costs are lower and inspected to current standards. There's another "killer. No competition. The market is too small to support it. The single exception seems to be Superior, so maybe it's the exception that proves the overall truth of what I say. When you personally went beyond the call of duty as an FAA representative you created good will. When a person of good will comes to participate in collective aviation fellowship, he is most likely welcomed. Presuming your demeanor did not changed over 34 years with the FAA, that exhibited by a large number of your compatriots has. The Bob Hoover mess is a good example that no one can explain away. I never read of any "internal revolt" or censure of FAA representatives responsible for its initiation and/or its persecution. (Yeah, that's not an error, it's the appropriate word specifically chosen for the context)! When the highly capable mechanics and federal representatives from, say 1945 thru 1955, originated a 337 for a given Ercoupe another owner could pretty well bank on being able to do the same thing. Everyone had some fundamental pride in knowing what they were doing. With that went a willingness to "lend a hand" and accept responsibility commensurate with the authority exercised. That attitude today is exceedingly rare. An owner is expected to originate engineering data ad infinitum at his own expense so the FAA representative need neither know nor take responsibility for anything. In my opinion they no longer render fair value for services well paid that cannot be refused. One is also known by the company they keep, and by what those people do and do not do. In the time of Attilla, there was a basic form of democracy. Anyone who would live as required of a Hun could be a Hun. It was the ultimate equal opportunity form of government for that era. So it is highly likely some men of good will found advantage in joining the Huns. For those on the receiving end of a Hun attack, these Huns were probably impossible to tell from the others; and made no difference in the "long run". Today the apparent FAA approach to public relations (judged by the present regulatory process and the manner in which it is implemented, enforced, and maintained) is on a par with "If you're the only girl in town, you don't need deodorant." If there is anyone interested in having the FAA genuinely rejoin the aviation community as a partner in common cause (and not a dictator), they sure keep a low profile. Individual FAA feifdoms (or Regions) promulgating different "acceptable" interpretations of applicable federal rules, if allowed in the federal legal system, would bring it to its knees. Some representatives openly intimidate. As the FAA increasingly demonstrates disrespect bordering on contempt for those they purportedly "serve", is it any wonder their reputation has suffers comensurately? To many of us, the FAA is an increasing threat to a way of life not unlike the Hun of old. Mechanics dare say nothing. Their licenses are issued by the FAA, and they hold few, if any cards in a 337, etc, negotiation with the most ill qualified and obtuse FAA representative. Really bad system. Best description might be a kakistocracy (Ask Jeeves on the web). With friends like this, U.S. aviation doesn't need enemies. Regional meetings of a hundred or so of the same pilots time after time (that no one listens to anyway) are organized periodically. Useless. Any solution requires recognition of the extent of the genuine problems that exist and making the correction of those problems a high priority with reasonable resources and executive support. Yeah, like reforming the "culture" of the IRS ;<) Do you know anyone in the FAA heirarchy actively and publicly doing that? Our own Bill Coons, whom I count a friend and highly respect, does his dead level best day in and day out and creates all kinds of good will. But there's only one of him, and he's no spring chicken either. What will his replacement be like? It should be a wake-up call to any in the FAA who might care that none of the facts I strung together below are easily refuted. There is always hope, however. A majority of Americans genuinely believe in redemption! Regards, WRB -- On Jan 5, 2005, at 8:07 PM, roger anderson wrote: > (quoting WRB) "but keep in mind that refers to > members of an unelected agency comprised of career bureaucrats that has > already achieved every politician's dream...unlimited (personal) > authority without meaningful (personal) responsibility!" Wow....I really felt that my 34 years in the FAA, trying to provide the best possible service to our customers, and also having devoted the past 46 years to flying and aircraft ownership, through the years occasionally made me a welcome member of our collective aviation fellowship. I never realized that I had only achieved the status of the above quote. I think I'll turn in my cook's hat at the next EAA monthly breakfast and tell them I'm not worthy. roger ========================================================================== ==== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
