RCU Forums - View Single Post - Turbine Waiver Rule Changes
View Single Post
Old 06-08-2021, 10:58 AM
  #35  
rhklenke
My Feedback: (24)
 
rhklenke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 5,998
Likes: 0
Received 34 Likes on 21 Posts
Default New proposed rules

Guys,

Let me just make a comment on the new proposed rules and the process we go through to bring them up for consideration.

The AMA Safety Committee and the Executive Committee (EC) are the keepers of the rules. Everything must go through them for discussion and ultimately for approval.

The JPO is a Special Interest Group (SIG) of the AMA. Like other SIGs, the Safety Committee and the EC use the SIGs as the technical experts in their areas. Sometimes the SIGs propose new or updated rules based on inputs from their constituents, and sometimes the EC and Safety Committee ask the SIGs to propose new rules based on their discussions and knowledge.

In this case, it was a mix of both. The JPO received significant inputs from AMA turbine waiver holders (probably the majority of whom are not JPO members) requesting some updates to the waiver signoff process. After receiving those inputs, we further discussed the proposals with members of the turbine community (again not all JPO members). Some of the suggestions were not further proposed to the AMA for numerous reasons, and some of them were. Before they were included in the proposed rule update, we talked with quite a few members of the community and got, and listened to, their feedback. During this process, we didn’t even ask if they were JPO members, nor was it a consideration in evaluating the feedback (do you sense a theme here yet?)

As for the 12 lb rule, some on the EC and Safety Committee had received requests to revisit this provision – primarily because the technology has advanced significantly since it was instituted and with the proliferation of many excellent lower-cost small turbines, it is now possible to have a fully functional turbine-powered aircraft that is less than 12 lbs dry. It was felt by many that the hard 12 lb limit for waiver flights was too exclusionary.

In evaluating this requested change, we considered all alternatives, from not changing the rule at all, to elimination any minimum weight requirement, to adding a “small turbine” waiver class that was separate from the normal turbine waiver. Again, with feedback from members of the turbine community, we suggested that allowing aircraft less than 12 lbs dry for the waiver flight with some minimum requirements was the best alternative and answered the concerns of most of the constituents who expressed an opinion on the subject. Thus, that is what we proposed to the Safety Committee for their consideration.

You can easily see from the previous comments in this thread, that opinions on exactly how we should address this issue are a numerous as the number of people who hold them. *Every* alternative is a compromise and will not make everyone happy, but we felt that what we proposed was the best choice. If the Safety Committee and the EC agree, then that is what will be adopted. In the future, changes can always be proposed if a better alternative emerges.

As for the comments on the process and the JPO, they are, to be polite, a bunch of baloney. I am the President of the JPO for one simple reason – I was asked to volunteer for the job and I agreed. I agreed for one simple reason – because I love this hobby and I believe that the turbine community needs a knowledgeable voice within the AMA to help guide issues, like this rules proposal, that affect us. Frankly, it takes a significant amount of my time, but I think it’s worth it. The other *volunteer* officers of the JPO feel the same.

I fly my “JPO President” flag at all of the events I attend, First in Flight, Kentucky Jets, Tiger Meet, Super Jets South, among others. I am always open to talking with anyone about any issue that affects the hobby (unless I’m actually flying, getting ready to fly, or are elbow deep inside a jet – you know how that goes, right?). I *never* preface the conversation with “are you a member of the JPO?” It doesn’t matter, the JPO represents *all* the jet community, not just the members.

Being a member of the JPO costs $25 per year. This cost just barely covers the costs of our quarterly newletter, “Contrails,” which done completely by volunteers, including our really hard-working editor, Greg Moore, and the JPO “Top Gun” Trophy that is awarded at many jet events. You can easily join or renew your JPO membership at www.jetpilots.org using Paypal. All of the JPO activities, including the publishing of Contrails and providing the Top Gun trophies are completed by *volunteers* - turbine community members, who like me, believe that supporting our part of the hobby in an organized manner is worth their time.

If you go to the JPO website, you will notice that some of our districts do not have a dedicated representative. That is not because there are no turbine waiver holders in that district, but because no member of the community in that district has volunteered their time to fill that position.

For those who grumble about not being part of the process or not being asked for their opinion, I have one suggestion - get involved, it’s as simple as that. If you are a member of the jet community in a District without a JPO Rep, volunteer for the position. If you have a District Rep, talk to them and see how you can help out. If all else fails, talk to me. I guarantee I’ll listen (unless I’m occupied as outlined above!), and I'll be happy to find a way for you to help out.



Bob Klenke

JPO President

[email protected]

Last edited by rhklenke; 06-08-2021 at 11:16 AM.
The following 6 users liked this post by rhklenke:
Auburn02 (06-08-2021), CraigG (06-09-2021), Ron S (06-09-2021), smcharg (06-30-2021), Sparhawk (06-14-2021), Viper1GJ (06-08-2021) and 1 others liked this post. (Show less...)