Strong Airline Support for FAA Nominee

tonyw

tonyw

Well-Known Member
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123819602988561403.html#mod=rss_US_News

The White House announced that Randolph "Randy" Babbitt, a second-generation pilot-union leader turned aviation consultant, will be nominated to head the Federal Aviation Administration, at a time of turmoil for the agency as well as the airlines it regulates.

A former labor activist versed in the politics and economics of the industry, Mr. Babbitt's union credentials stretch back to the bitter employee-management battles that helped bring down Eastern Airlines decades ago. Mr. Babbitt, 62, served two terms as head of the country's largest commercial-pilot union during the 1990s, before becoming an aviation industry consultant and serving on various government panels.

Friday's appointment prompted predictable accolades from various labor leaders. But reflecting Mr. Babbitt's ability to appeal to industry, airline executives and the industry's main lobbying group also chimed in with expressions of strong support.


Management and unions agreeing on something? What's next? Cats and dogs lying together? Mass chaos?
 
How long do you figure this guy will care anything about airline pilots, or be willing to try to help them if he did care, after he gets in the lofty circles of power in DC ? He WAS a union leader...past tense.

Just a question...
 
meritflyer said:
You need to retire rather than complaining about user fees and how you can't hold Mexico overnights.

I heard Walmart is hiring greeters.
Click to expand...

ZapBrannigan said:
General Aviation, 135, 91K, and corporate aviation are going to fight them. Get used to it.
Click to expand...

Eh just ignore him. He is just throwing out some more flame bait.

The user fee question was a valid question. It doesn't matter what your stance is on the subject.
 
User fees are not going to happen. Both the chair of the committee that handles FAA business and the ranking minority member are opposed to them. They ain't happening.

Besides, seeing how you've got to pay north of $100 a hour these days to rent a POS C172, if they did charge $5 to file a flight plan, it's peanuts.
 
Airline guy here.... I will stand pat against user fees. They will do nothing for the NAS and only hurt the little guys. The NAS *is* overcrowded, but that's the airlines fault. Heck just look at the Atlanta airport. During the weather a couple of days ago, it took 50 (that's right, five-zero) minutes to taxi from runway 10 to the C gates. Was I impeded, slowed down, blocked, or annoyed by a private aircraft? No, the holding we did on the ground in both TLH and ATL, and in the air, all caused by airline oversaturation.

Give me a break - user fees won't help with delays - it's the airlines that cause that problem.

Never ever been held up by you private guys. On the other hand, we almost had to hold in TLH a couple of nights ago after the tower closed because ACEY wanted to shoot a god-danged full ILS with no clouds around.
 
cencal83406 said:
Never ever been held up by you private guys. On the other hand, we almost had to hold in TLH a couple of nights ago after the tower closed because ACEY wanted to shoot a god-danged full ILS with no clouds around.
Click to expand...

Now that's suspect.

Was it a 900?

If so, it's part of our certification process. Sorry that you were caught up in it.
 
You know -- this may not have been the situation at all (and it's WAAAAY off -topic) but if you have not been to an airport before, or there is unusual terrain in the area there is no shame in requesting an ILS (or other instrument approach).

Personally I will almost always elect to fly an approach if it is nighttime and I have not been to the airport in question in recent memory.

It's interesting that you chose TLH for your example. In 2002, while being vectored for an approach, FedEx 1478 visually aquired TLH and decided to try a visual. Runway 9 in TLH has very very few visual cues at night. The approach ended in disaster.

(There's been speculation that the FO was colorblind and that they didn't fly the PAPI etc. -- but that's not the point)

The point, however, is that if you're unfamiliar, and it is night-time... why not just go ahead and take a few extra minutes and fly the approach? You're virtually guaranteed obstacle and terrain clearance.

So -- my point -- I don't see any issue with ASA, Delta, a Citation, or a Seminole electing to fly the approach if they're uncomfortable with attempting a visual at night.

Just my opinion. That and $3.00 will get you a cup of Starbucks.
 
ZapBrannigan said:
You know -- this may not have been the situation at all (and it's WAAAAY off -topic) but if you have not been to an airport before, or there is unusual terrain in the area there is no shame in requesting an ILS (or other instrument approach).

Personally I will almost always elect to fly an approach if it is nighttime and I have not been to the airport in question in recent memory.

It's interesting that you chose TLH for your example. In 2002, while being vectored for an approach, FedEx 1478 visually aquired TLH and decided to try a visual. Runway 9 in TLH has very very few visual cues at night. The approach ended in disaster.

(There's been speculation that the FO was colorblind and that they didn't fly the PAPI etc. -- but that's not the point)

The point, however, is that if you're unfamiliar, and it is night-time... why not just go ahead and take a few extra minutes and fly the approach? You're virtually guaranteed obstacle and terrain clearance.

So -- my point -- I don't see any issue with ASA, Delta, a Citation, or a Seminole electing to fly the approach if they're uncomfortable with attempting a visual at night.

Just my opinion. That and $3.00 will get you a cup of Starbucks.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:



Kevin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top