by
Darryl Phillips
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore."
That slogan was made famous in the movie Network. It should be the slogan of everyone who loves to fly. The mid-level bureaucrats within the FAA are trampling the rights of citizens and violating the most basic tenets of common sense and fair play. These Civil Service employees are free to operate as they please without regard to the will of Congress or the FAA Administrator. They are destroying aviation, and have become so blatant about it they don't even try to hide their actions. They totally disregard the laws of our country, and their own rules and procedures as well. I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore.
Item. We all get old, and CFIs are no exception. Many highly qualified CFIs eventually lose their medicals, as we each may. At the point in life where they have the most experience to pass on, they should be welcomed as ground instructors, conducting simulator flights and ground school, even BFRs or other instructional flights where there is another qualified pilot at the controls. We need to learn from the best, yet the FAA proposed to banish the best.
Banished, not just from the air but from ground instruction too.
When a furor developed over this, FAA withdrew the requirement as "premature". They "may or may not" make the same proposal later. In the meantime, however, they still prohibit a CFI from renewing his certificate via refresher courses more than twice. Then he or she must take a check ride with an FAA examiner. But the CFI can't take that ride without a medical. So in spite of the furor, the FAA got'em anyway.
The result is that most pilots get to take Biennial Flight Reviews with 250-hour CFIs who have never flown over real mountains in a single engine aircraft at night, or iced an airframe, or won an argument with ATC, or all the other wisdom we need to absorb.
Item. The FAA is going after "bogus" parts. Sounds reasonable on the surface. We all want to know that the bolts holding the wings are certified strength. But there is a difference between the bolt that holds the wing, and the screw that holds the microphone bracket. If I lost that screw, I'd replace it with whatever fit and looked good. Not so, says the FAA. Effective next year, every part and particle of your aircraft must be certified, and you've got to be able to prove it. No longer can your avionics shop replace one resistor with another of equal size and rating. Now, they have to special order the exact part from the manufacturer just to have the certification paperwork, and a two cent part becomes a fifty dollar component. Your IA will be putting his certificate and his livelihood on the line with each plane he annuals. Strict compliance is the watchword.
The FAA says the law has been on the books since 1958, now they're going to enforce it. Who benefits? Like Deep Throat told Woodward and Bernstein, follow the money. First the aircraft manufacturers benefit. They made their money when they sold the plane, and if they can sole-source every nut and rivet at exorbitant prices they'll make more now. Otherwise, every aircraft grounded is one less potential liability suit. And of course the airlines benefit, both in airspace and by eliminating Part 135 operations. Cut operating costs and raise revenues. The Federal Airline Agency is very sensitive to what the airlines want.
Right now FAA is introducing the policy at seminars here and in Europe. Europe? Why is a United States Agency establishing rules in Europe? Does Texas make rules for Connecticut? Isn't the federal government wasting enough money right here at home, without overseeing aviation in Europe?
Of course there will be some compromise regarding bogus parts. After a long fight, the FAA won't get all they wanted, and neither will we. Prohibit the minorities from riding the bus at all, then they'll be happy to compromise and sit in the back. AOPA, EAA, and all the rest will congratulate themselves for saving general aviation from total ruin, and settle for semi-ruin. Problem is, we've been settling for semi-ruin time after time, and half of half of half....well, you get the idea.
I sympathize with the leaders of EAA and AOPA. Like the Chamber of Commerce in a town that's dying, or cheerleaders of the last-place ballteam, they've got to keep smiling and shouting "We're Number One!". It takes dollars to continue the fight, and that requires membership, which requires maintaining a good spirit. But the battles they fight are defensive battles. Sometimes AOPA wins, and aviation keeps the status quo. Sometimes they don't win, and our right to fly suffers. Most of the battles are settled in compromise, and we lose a little. But defensive maneuvers never gain any ground, we need offense for that. As long as we're pinned down reacting to proposed new restrictions, we can't mount an effective offense. What aviation needs isn't more smiling lobbyists, we need frowning pilots, marching to the Federal courthouse shouting "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore".
Item. Federal law requires all agencies, including FAA, to carefully consider the costs of a proposed regulation. But FAA has learned how to duck that law. Take the recent requirement for two-hour Biennial Flight Reviews. First, FAA wrote an Advisory Circular, suggesting that two hours would be a good idea. CFIs, most of them building time on the way to airline employment, adhere to the AC, they sure don't want any negative comments in their FAA record. Then FAA proposes to require the two hour minimum. And they show that there is no cost, because two hours is normal anyway! Did AOPA or EAA call them on this? They did not, and now the requirement is law.
FAA pulled the same stunt when they wrote an AC requiring lighted taxiway and runway signs at small airports. They don't have to consider the cost if it's only advisory. But all airports that receive federal funding are required to comply with Advisory Circulars, so there is nothing "advisory" about it. If a pilot tried to use such convoluted self serving arguments in court, the Judge would not be amused.
Item. FAA is sending letters to airmen threatening legal action if they don't get their transponders fixed. These notices originate when ATC loses a particular transponder from the scope, almost always due to frequency overloading from TCAS and other factors in the system, not from a problem in the individual aircraft. The pilot must take his plane to the shop, the technician must spend time and resources proving the equipment is OK, and a report must be submitted back to FAA within 30 days. All at aircraft owner expense, of course.
Why don't pilots require the same of the FAA equipment? The problem is real, and safety requires that it be addressed. If we pilots have to get it fixed within a month or face penalties, why shouldn't the feds?
Item. In a poignant letter published recently in SPORT AVIATION, a man tells of taking his son to a general aviation airport. The security fence prevented them from seeing the planes up close, so they settled for watching from outside the fence. Soon a security vehicle roared up, lights flashing. They were told it was illegal to be there, and were threatened with arrest. The kid was scared, perhaps this will always be his memory of aviation.
A fence has one purpose, to establish a line. Whether it's to keep your horses in, or the neighbor's dogs out, or to establish "security" at an airport, a fence says "This far and no further". If FAA required a bigger perimeter, they should have built a bigger fence. And beyond that fence they should leave law abiding people alone.
But letters to the editor won't do it. Each of us need to fight for our rights. In court when necessary. We don't lose our rights in some jungle or desert on the other side of the earth, we lose them at City Hall, at the State Capitol, and most particularly at 800 Independence Ave. NW, Washington DC. Many thousands of our young men have died for our freedom, and I think they would be sad to see how little we value their sacrifice. Each time we shrug our shoulders and step further back from the fence, we erode the very thing those boys died for.
Repeat after me, "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore".