Thanks Thanks:  0
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Congressional bills to eliminate the LODA

  1. #1
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like

    Congressional bills to eliminate the LODA

    Since the FAA won't fix it, perhaps Congress will?
    https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...m_medium=email
    N1PA
    Likes dgapilot liked this post

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    412
    Post Thanks / Like
    I believe that this would be a viable means of addressing the LODA issue (as it currently sits for certain categorizations). However, it runs the real risk of, just like the originating incident, that once the door is opened, the end result is uncertain and bad results could happen. The current LODA situation / status arose because someone chose to fight the FAA and now there is a court ruling that, even though the ruling is not immediately binding, the FAA feels necessary to comply with.

    Wouldn't it have been better if the original fight was avoided, the rules followed, and the then-status quo remained?

    I worry that there may be unintended consequences of pursuing this action particularly in the current environment in D.C. where government activism / control is not entirely viewed with disfavor.

  3. #3
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    House passes amendment to reverse FAA flight training policy.

    https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2021/september/24/house-passes-amendment-to-reverse-faa-flight-training-policy?utm_source=ebrief&utm_medium=email
    N1PA

  4. #4
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pa12drvr View Post
    I believe that this would be a viable means of addressing the LODA issue (as it currently sits for certain categorizations). However, it runs the real risk of, just like the originating incident, that once the door is opened, the end result is uncertain and bad results could happen. The current LODA situation / status arose because someone chose to fight the FAA and now there is a court ruling that, even though the ruling is not immediately binding, the FAA feels necessary to comply with.

    Wouldn't it have been better if the original fight was avoided, the rules followed, and the then-status quo remained?

    I worry that there may be unintended consequences of pursuing this action particularly in the current environment in D.C. where government activism / control is not entirely viewed with disfavor.

    The REAL issue here isn't necessarily the LODA itself. The 800 pound gorilla in this room is the change in language regarding flight instruction that the FAA Legal types adopted without consulting anyone. THAT is what the Congressional bills are really about.

    The policy on flight instructing has for many, many decades been that a flight instructor is NOT flying or operating an aircraft. A Flight Instructor, in this definition, is in fact providing "Instructional services", which may occasionally involve demonstrating something, but the primary function is instruction, NOT operating the airplane.

    The FAA Legal team (trying to be kind with terminology here, though I don't know why) adopted, as a result of this case, the language that a flight instructor is in fact, "operating an aircraft for compensation or hire". Which means several things.

    First, it means every flight instructor MUST possess a second class medical certificate. Lots currently don't.

    Second, it MAY significantly change the way the insurance industry looks at flight instruction.

    Third, down the road, bear in mind that virtually every situation where a pilot is "operating for compensation or hire" requires an operating certificate. At present, Part 141 schools are the only flight instruction programs that require an operating certificate. In fact, there are major disincentives to operate under Part 141....trust me.

    So, there are a lot of issues involved here. There are in fact some pretty experienced pilots who post on this forum who I suspect are operating under Basic Med. IF this new language now becomes policy (and it will as things stand), those folks will NOT be able to flight instruct unless they acquire a second class medical.

    As to unintended consequences, consider the Congressional action that created Basic Med, which, by the way, was introduced and sponsored by the same two Congressional reps: Inhofe and Graves. There were no "unintended consequences" associated with that bill, and the bill literally flew through Congress.

    It's likely the same could happen with this bill. Frankly, lots of folks in Congress kinda like a bill that's non controversial, and they can say they supported it. Especially if it involves "correcting a wrong" created by a federal agency.

    Please folks, consider writing to your Congressional representatives and ask them to support these two bills.

    MTV
    Likes skywagon8a, wireweinie, Brandsman liked this post

  5. #5
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mike, It's a shame the FAA has lost it's rudder and it takes the actions of a few good congress people with our pushing to straighten the ship.
    N1PA
    Likes wireweinie, yellowbird69, Brandsman liked this post

  6. #6
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    Mike, It's a shame the FAA has lost it's rudder and it takes the actions of a few good congress people with our pushing to straighten the ship.
    Pete,

    I couldn't agree with you more. I used to have a lot of respect for many in the FAA. It's a lot harder these days to say anything positive about the agency. And, that's really unfortunate.

    Just the speed with which they created the "LODA" thing, to correct something THEY did should tell you all you need to know.

    MTV
    Likes skywagon8a, WWhunter liked this post

  7. #7
    jimcrawford01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    North Conway, NH
    Posts
    20
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mike
    Thank You for pushing this issue.
    Jim

  8. #8
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,597
    Post Thanks / Like
    Defund the FAA?
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
    Likes RaisedByWolves liked this post

  9. #9
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Defund the FAA?
    Wouldn’t do any good. They have HUGE funding now, and nothing gets done. Less funding: they could actually start doing things and REALLY screw things up.

    MTV
    Likes Brandsman liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Pictures of Bills trip ?
    By Larry G in forum Tales of the PA18
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-26-2016, 12:21 AM
  2. RAF Seeks Congressional Airstrip Funding
    By SJ in forum In The News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-06-2015, 12:08 PM
  3. How to eliminate intercom noise?
    By Speedo in forum Super Cub Sick Bay
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-07-2015, 10:54 PM
  4. Start saving your $50 bills
    By Fabman in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-17-2008, 08:23 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •