3 ms·

If everyone writing regulations were as rigorous as the FAA people wouldn’t be clamoring to reduce regulations.

dylan604 2y ago
You mean the same FAA people that allowed Boeing to self certify? The FAA is not spotless. I can only imagine how much worse air travel would be without them, but they are only run by humans trying to work in a political controlled environment.
- camgunz 2y ago
  The FAA is pretty bonkers; Rayiner is right here. Besides, what other system beyond "humans trying to work in a political controlled environment" are you advocating here?
- craftsman 2y ago
  Congress directed the FAA--by law--to delegate certain aspects of certification to non-FAA entities. This directive was issued by H.R. 302 - FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, 115th Congress.
  - Brybry 2y ago
    Is that the 49 USC 44736 Organization designation authorizations part?[1] [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/text/enr#:~:text=%60%60Sec.%2044736.%20Organization%20designation%20authorizations https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/...
    - craftsman 2y ago
      Yes, the ODAs. I'm not making a value judgement that this is good, bad, or indifferent. I'm just trying to provide factual context to understand when and why the delegation of certain aspects of certification has occurred.
- throw0101d 2y ago
  > You mean the same FAA people that allowed Boeing to self certify? Reputation lags reality. Boeing used to be a product-first organization, and the FAA relied on that. However Boeing changed and put other priorities first and started cutting corners but their reputation was still good. After all, why would Boeing (unlike, say, tobacco) sell products that would kill their customers: it would be against Boeing's own interests. In the 1980s and 1990s Boeing could be trusted to have less oversight, but since the 2000s that was no longer true, but no one noticed that. Now everyone recognizes that Boeing needs a babysitter.
  - dboreham 2y ago
    > sell products that would kill their customers Because the company ended up being run by people who had no clue what it takes to not kill your customers.
krisoft 2y ago
The existence of all the "FAA: We are not happy until you are not happy" funny t-shirts seems to disagree with that observation.
y33t 2y ago
Ehh...FAA is kind of crazy and subject to a certain conceit. That's not to say they're bad, or always wrong, but they are a little nuts. For instance there's a rule that says you can't fly under a bridge. A floatplane pilot was on the water, increased his speed so that his floats got on a plane, while still on the water. FAA decided this was flying, even though he was going below stall speed and was by definition not flying. Courts until recently deferred judgement to the agencies that made the rules, and the guy lost his case (and his pilot's license? Don't recall). Also see how shooting a drone flying over your property (even if they don't have a transponder and are literally watching your kids) gets treated as downing an aircraft. Also see the recent kerfuffle between FAA and FCC with 5G. That was just nuts.

You mean the same FAA people that allowed Boeing to self certify? The FAA is not spotless. I can only imagine how much worse air travel would be without them, but they are only run by humans trying to work in a political controlled environment.

camgunz 2y ago
The FAA is pretty bonkers; Rayiner is right here. Besides, what other system beyond "humans trying to work in a political controlled environment" are you advocating here?
craftsman 2y ago
Congress directed the FAA--by law--to delegate certain aspects of certification to non-FAA entities. This directive was issued by H.R. 302 - FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, 115th Congress.
- Brybry 2y ago
  Is that the 49 USC 44736 Organization designation authorizations part?[1] [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/text/enr#:~:text=%60%60Sec.%2044736.%20Organization%20designation%20authorizations https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/...
  - craftsman 2y ago
    Yes, the ODAs. I'm not making a value judgement that this is good, bad, or indifferent. I'm just trying to provide factual context to understand when and why the delegation of certain aspects of certification has occurred.
throw0101d 2y ago
> You mean the same FAA people that allowed Boeing to self certify? Reputation lags reality. Boeing used to be a product-first organization, and the FAA relied on that. However Boeing changed and put other priorities first and started cutting corners but their reputation was still good. After all, why would Boeing (unlike, say, tobacco) sell products that would kill their customers: it would be against Boeing's own interests. In the 1980s and 1990s Boeing could be trusted to have less oversight, but since the 2000s that was no longer true, but no one noticed that. Now everyone recognizes that Boeing needs a babysitter.
- dboreham 2y ago
  > sell products that would kill their customers Because the company ended up being run by people who had no clue what it takes to not kill your customers.

krisoft 2y ago

The existence of all the "FAA: We are not happy until you are not happy" funny t-shirts seems to disagree with that observation.

y33t 2y ago

Ehh...FAA is kind of crazy and subject to a certain conceit. That's not to say they're bad, or always wrong, but they are a little nuts. For instance there's a rule that says you can't fly under a bridge. A floatplane pilot was on the water, increased his speed so that his floats got on a plane, while still on the water. FAA decided this was flying, even though he was going below stall speed and was by definition not flying. Courts until recently deferred judgement to the agencies that made the rules, and the guy lost his case (and his pilot's license? Don't recall). Also see how shooting a drone flying over your property (even if they don't have a transponder and are literally watching your kids) gets treated as downing an aircraft. Also see the recent kerfuffle between FAA and FCC with 5G. That was just nuts.