Good News! But is it part of the new political atmosphere?

[Schllc]

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2024-11-03/faa-rescinds-burdensome-maintenance-interpretation

[Jsno]

I think with the comments that the FAA got someone grew som common sense.

[AJ88V]

good to see some common sense.  Was surprised they didn't still disallow video supervision outright (the subject of the original inquiry).

[PT20J]

It ain't over yet. Last paragraph: 

This stay does not represent a conclusion on the contents of that interpretation and will be effective until such time as the agency issues new or supplemental guidance.

[hammdo]

Same response when they deferred it…

-Don

[Rick Junkin]

This occurred before the election following an effort spearheaded by Jeff Simon of Social Flight and Mike Busch of Savvy Aviation. There’s a number of Social Flight video segments with Jeff and Mike discussing how it all came about and why.

[MikeOH]

Yeah, this is just a 'stay', not an outright retraction of the Moss Letter.  Pragmatically, however, as long as the FAA remains silent it is rescinded.

[dkkim73]

If the government is "trimmed down" or at least boundaries are reiterated (a la Chevron) then maybe it is part of the political atmosphere. 

But I kind of wonder if GA is niche enough that good advocacy will primarily depend on a few good advocates, e.g. like James Inhofe used to be. This never used to be partisan except when viewed with a "Green" spin, and aside from the usual stereotypes of "the rich" and lead phobias, I'm not sure it's on most people's scopes... Generally safetyites and anti-freedom types fear GA, but it's not an issue with visibility outside those who bought a house next to the Inner Marker and immediately started writing letters to the paper

I wonder what will evolve.  

Montana's new senator has aviation industry experience and has flown GA; he seems like a potential advocate from my impression. 

D

[N201MKTurbo]

I’m currently supervising an annual on a plane more complex than a Mooney.

Im confidant the owner is more than capable of doing the tasks I ask him to do. And I will check his work anyway. 
 

His plane is better maintained than most. It would be a travesty to make this process illegal.  

[A64Pilot]

9 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I’m currently supervising an annual on a plane more complex than a Mooney.

Im confidant the owner is more than capable of doing the tasks I ask him to do. And I will check his work anyway. 
 

His plane is better maintained than most. It would be a travesty to make this process illegal.  

I don’t see how you could really, for example Repair Stations and manufacturers labor force is overwhelmingly people with zero FAA Certification. When pushed my Inspector told me the reason I had to issue “repair station certificates” was only so the FAA would have jurisdiction over them. The Certificates were worthless otherwise. But then the people on the factory floor had no such Certificates and therefore weren’t subject to FAA being able to “touch” them. MIDO and FSDO differ significantly.

If supervision were to be disallowed then no aircraft could be manufactured and every Repair Station would have to shut down, and no one could get their A&P based on experience, except prior Military, because how could you get the experience? I think the number of A&P’s that didn’t go to school is higher than many expect, especially your local A&P, the school guys usually go to the Airlines etc.

I do think that the intent was to prevent ridiculous claims of supervision like show me the repair on your phone etc. and in my opinion that nonsense should be disallowed.

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:02 PM by A64Pilot

[A64Pilot]

11 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Yeah, this is just a 'stay', not an outright retraction of the Moss Letter.  Pragmatically, however, as long as the FAA remains silent it is rescinded.

That is what usually happens because these “letters” etc have no real force of law. FAR’s are LAW, so to really affect change you have to change the law, and that’s a lot more work than the FAA wants to do. You can fight these letters and AC’s but good luck fighting an FAR.

The FAA of course issues a lot of AC’s several modify procedures in Test Flights for aircraft certification, I or honestly my DER successfully fought the ACO in Atl and we did not follow the AC, we followed the FAR, specifically take off distance to 50’ sticks in my memory. 

[Fly Boomer]

On 11/11/2024 at 10:18 PM, dkkim73 said:

Montana's new senator has aviation industry experience and has flown GA; he seems like a potential advocate from my impression. 

I would probably vote for a congressperson with aviation experience, regardless of their political affiliation.