Hello....DoT....anybody home...?...anyone...?
Dear Secretary LaHood...
Did General Aviation do something to tick off DoT? Did somebody stop up the lavs at the Southeast Federal Center? Did one of us buzz New Jersey Ave. SE?
The question arises because once again, Mr. Secretary, DoT is demonstrating a disturbing tendency to treat commercial aviation as the only aviation -- that exists, that plays a role in America's economy, its well being and the movement of people and goods. Does an airplane have to be on a FAR 121 or 135 certificate to matter to DoT? Or is it that DoT staff can't read numbers below 100 -- as in FAR 91?
Sure looks like this is true. You've given us cause to carp before.
The last time you heard from me my complaint -- validated by the response of others -- came in mid-May in the form of a post to this blog observing how General Aviation was shortchanged (again) in representation on your Future of Aviation Advisory Committee. Knowing how much dumb stuff you have to read, you can refresh your memory about my comments here: http://ucap-podcast.blogspot.com/2010/05/shortchanged-again.html...we'll wait...OK...
Got it, Mr. Secretary? DoT short-sheeted GA in representation on this committee -- whose efforts we're just sure will be profound and far reaching, resulting in a new stack of paper to dust after shelving -- by appointing the head of a General Aviation manufacturer as the sole GA body, after naming multiple members from the airlines, airline unions, airline consulting and academia. No pilot group representation, no aircraft-owner or private-operator -- just one guy from a planemaker who just automatically will think in the same terms the rest of us support...right....
But, this is a new day and a new post about an old problem: Today, it's your department's five-year plan draft and DoT's seemingly willful refusal to acknowledge General Aviation as a transportation power and economic influence worthy of policy planning. Sucks, Mr. Secretary, just sucks how DoT again and again seems to act to ignore General Aviation...if you're getting any points, it should be only for consistency.
Now AOPA isn't exactly at the top of my fav's list these days, but in reviewing the salient materials the association's observation rings honest and accurate: "In its current form the (DoT) plan places more emphasis on travel by bicycle than on general aviation," AOPA President Craig Fuller wrote of the draft in a communication to you. You can catch up on this here:
http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2010/100701dot.html?WT.mc_id=ebrief
Five-thousand airports and not even 10 percent of them get airline service; half of those get Spartan, minimal, barely subsistence-level commercial service. Does anyone in your agency know or understand how the other 4,500-plus airports and their communities connect to the aviating outside world?
General Aviation, pure and simple.
General Aviation pilots flying General Aviation aircraft in and out of General Aviation airports...and connecting those communities to the rest of the world directly, hub-free and TSA compliant. Or is this the problem? The airlines haven't yet succeeded in suppressing General Aviation out of existence -- and out of competition -- so the DoT is helping my willfully ignoring it?
Without belaboring the nitty gritty details of how General Aviation would have to be invented -- if it hadn't come first, that is -- let me close with two questions:
First, regarding the Future of Aviation Advisory Committee, will DoT ever step up and correct the short-changed representations to something proportional to General Aviation's impact and influence? 'Cause right now, sir, it looks like you decided to just ignore the shortcoming and plow forward as if it will be meaningful anyway. Prove me wrong.
Second, will DoT similarly update this inadequate blueprint to something that recognizes a uniquely American institution, American General Aviation? Or will DoT continue to have eyes only for the Common Carriers?
Happy Independence Day Weekend, Mr. Secretary. Now, how about showing some independence and doing the right things for General Aviation?
Sorry -- guess that was three questions. You got the big office and the big title; prove me wrong -- please.
Respectfully,
Dave
Did General Aviation do something to tick off DoT? Did somebody stop up the lavs at the Southeast Federal Center? Did one of us buzz New Jersey Ave. SE?
The question arises because once again, Mr. Secretary, DoT is demonstrating a disturbing tendency to treat commercial aviation as the only aviation -- that exists, that plays a role in America's economy, its well being and the movement of people and goods. Does an airplane have to be on a FAR 121 or 135 certificate to matter to DoT? Or is it that DoT staff can't read numbers below 100 -- as in FAR 91?
Sure looks like this is true. You've given us cause to carp before.
The last time you heard from me my complaint -- validated by the response of others -- came in mid-May in the form of a post to this blog observing how General Aviation was shortchanged (again) in representation on your Future of Aviation Advisory Committee. Knowing how much dumb stuff you have to read, you can refresh your memory about my comments here: http://ucap-podcast.blogspot.com/2010/05/shortchanged-again.html...we'll wait...OK...
Got it, Mr. Secretary? DoT short-sheeted GA in representation on this committee -- whose efforts we're just sure will be profound and far reaching, resulting in a new stack of paper to dust after shelving -- by appointing the head of a General Aviation manufacturer as the sole GA body, after naming multiple members from the airlines, airline unions, airline consulting and academia. No pilot group representation, no aircraft-owner or private-operator -- just one guy from a planemaker who just automatically will think in the same terms the rest of us support...right....
But, this is a new day and a new post about an old problem: Today, it's your department's five-year plan draft and DoT's seemingly willful refusal to acknowledge General Aviation as a transportation power and economic influence worthy of policy planning. Sucks, Mr. Secretary, just sucks how DoT again and again seems to act to ignore General Aviation...if you're getting any points, it should be only for consistency.
Now AOPA isn't exactly at the top of my fav's list these days, but in reviewing the salient materials the association's observation rings honest and accurate: "In its current form the (DoT) plan places more emphasis on travel by bicycle than on general aviation," AOPA President Craig Fuller wrote of the draft in a communication to you. You can catch up on this here:
http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2010/100701dot.html?WT.mc_id=ebrief
Five-thousand airports and not even 10 percent of them get airline service; half of those get Spartan, minimal, barely subsistence-level commercial service. Does anyone in your agency know or understand how the other 4,500-plus airports and their communities connect to the aviating outside world?
General Aviation, pure and simple.
General Aviation pilots flying General Aviation aircraft in and out of General Aviation airports...and connecting those communities to the rest of the world directly, hub-free and TSA compliant. Or is this the problem? The airlines haven't yet succeeded in suppressing General Aviation out of existence -- and out of competition -- so the DoT is helping my willfully ignoring it?
Without belaboring the nitty gritty details of how General Aviation would have to be invented -- if it hadn't come first, that is -- let me close with two questions:
First, regarding the Future of Aviation Advisory Committee, will DoT ever step up and correct the short-changed representations to something proportional to General Aviation's impact and influence? 'Cause right now, sir, it looks like you decided to just ignore the shortcoming and plow forward as if it will be meaningful anyway. Prove me wrong.
Second, will DoT similarly update this inadequate blueprint to something that recognizes a uniquely American institution, American General Aviation? Or will DoT continue to have eyes only for the Common Carriers?
Happy Independence Day Weekend, Mr. Secretary. Now, how about showing some independence and doing the right things for General Aviation?
Sorry -- guess that was three questions. You got the big office and the big title; prove me wrong -- please.
Respectfully,
Dave
posted by Dave Higdon at
3:35 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home