----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
-----Original Message----- From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 9:02 PM To: Ed Burkhead Subject: WRB Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Class 3 med exam. Begin forwarded message: Sorry guys, accidentally transmitted this FLYIN message to the TECH list. I now relay it to FLYIN, as some only sign up for it (or TECH) individually. WRB > RLYFLYIN (WRB via Ed Burkhead's computer-I can't post directly) > Please send responses directly to the list or to me, Bill Bayne @ > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Hi Doc (WRB speaking), > > I'm impressed! Even understanding the "starting point" you've got the > "fire". > > Have at it, and know you're not alone. Count me as another > enthusiastic (if pessimistic) anarchist. > Let me know any way I can help. (maybe I should sign this Sancho?) > > Another potentially HUGE and current threat is the latest FAA NRPM > (AOPA response link) : > > http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/050413aircraft_letter.pdf > > The problem (and the culprit) is the same, and I'm sure the EAA must > also respond to this. > > Maybe the "key" to long term "success" is to rip the mask off the > "faceless" bureaucrat responsible for this proposal. Go after him/her, > first to determine the name, and then individually. Establish an > example that we, the people DO have a right to know who does what to > us, and that we CAN "reach out and touch someone" in the FAA that does > things like this. Bring enough fire on this person or committee and > this rogue agency may have to back down. A worthwhile lesson should > become apparent at some point down the line. > > So, commander - we await your orders! > > Regards, > > WRB > > -- > > On Apr 17, 2005, at 6:57 PM, Dr. R. B. wrote: > >>>> There has to be a number? If you accept that statement, then by > the >>>> rules of logic you MUST ALSO accept the following statement: A >>>> committee sitting in a room knows more about a pilot's physical >>>> ability to fly an airplane than the doctor examining him. Or her. >>> >>> (WRB speaking) And the FAA would ask "What's your point?" They use >>> such logic in much that they do, and we meekly accept it. >>>> >> ***************** [RB] My point is precisely that: we meekly accept >> it. We shouldn't. >> >>> Unfortunately, general aviation as we know (knew?) it IS dead.It is >>> in an ever-increasing state of putrescence. In twenty years, maybe >>> sooner, we will be where Europe is today (more's the pity). We >>> are the LAST American "general aviation" generation. >> >> ******************** [RB] I can't disagree with your facts. I merely >> continue to hope. To my mind, the overwhelming importance of EAA's >> Sport Pilot initiative is not that it gets more pilots into more >> planes, but that the FAA actually listened and acted! This gives me >> GREAT hope. >> >>>> We Baby Boomers comprise a 40 million person spike in American >>>> generational demographics. America will never produce another >>>> generation as large as ours. Many of us are now entering retirement >>>> age and ALL OF US ARE OVER 40! Now think about that for a moment, >>>> and >>>> think about the POWER we have. >>> >>> Could have. We have been so conditioned that we are totally at the >>> mercy of whatever these unelected and effectively unaccountable >>> tyrants >>> dream up we've already lost effective access to many of the freedoms >>> postwar pilots into the seventies enjoyed. Specifically the > "presumed >>> guilty" mind set of the FAA and the NTSB, and our meaningful access > to >>> previously approved STCs and 337s. Over the years, the FAA has >>> learned >>> pilots are easily intimidated and utterly toothless over time in >>> defending their "rights"! >> >> ***************** [RB] Can't disagree with THAT, either. >> However...perhaps we can get ourselves together. Perhaps the unifying >> factor is simply that we're too old, too wrinkled, too crusty, and too >> bad-tempered to care anymore. The actual catalyst doesn't matter. We >> have to make our voice known. "Sport Pilot" is a start, a hell of a >> good start. Let's keep it rolling! >> Let's roll it right along to the age thing and get ourselves in the >> decision stream before it's too late and we're all either sitting >> watching the Military Channel or sneaking upstairs in our old ships >> waiting to get caught. >> >> We have to say to the FAA: "Either listen attentively to the citizens >> who pay your upkeep, and the peole for whom you are in business in the >> first place, or we're going to pongalo en sus culos." For those of you >> who are single-language, find a friend who doesn't mind translating >> gutter-Spanish. Then we have to make good on that promise. >> The FAA MUST address this... >>> >>> Sorry Doc, they don't. It's not in their mind-set. They regularly >>> show regulatory contempt for those they purportedly serve! >> >> Absolutely! That's the hallmark of a bureaucrat, an identifying >> feature of the breed. The chief difference >> between a bureaucrat and a politician is insulation. Both despise the >> electorate, but politicians must at >> least seem attentive; bureaucrats need not even seem to listen. >>> >>>> ...we MUST make sure they do it in an inclusionary way, not in the >>>> exclusionary way that their regulations are now written. >>> >>> Emphasis on the WE! Now, what proactive tools do we have? >> >> ******************* [RB] Well, where did the whole Sport Pilot thing >> come from? SOMEBODY sure did SOMETHING right and whatever they did >> got FAA's attention. What should we do? Me, I'd start with EAA and >> Senator John Glenn. >> >> Dr. R. Beeman > > > > > ======================================================================= > ======= > To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm > Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/ > > > ========================================================================== ==== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
