AMA EC Minutes Jan. 23 2010 (FAA INFO)
03-11-2010, 01:27 PM
#26
Thread Starter
RE: AMA EC Minutes Jan. 23 2010 (FAA INFO)
I don't know what "Carry On" means in your world. I know what it meant to me in the military. (16 good years, 13 active).
I also feel exactly as KidEpoxy does when he stated:
"Looks to me FAA is telling AMA exactly what to do for AMA to exempt itself from practically all restrictions,
but that AMA has better things to do than follow FAA's instructions."
In my 28 years of dealing with FAA, whenever they determined a need for dealing, I have very little confidence in anything they might say, until after the fact. They are a government entity, therefore they go the easiest route which promotes their own self well-being.
My own experiences include criminal charges by FAA which were thrown out of the first court, and not allowed in a Federal District Court when the FAA tried to appeal a previous Not Guilty because, "....no crime exists..." as determined by the judge.
Having survived six-consecutive audits in a row, six calendar years, at one time past, I rather believe the IRS than the FAA.
Edited to add: That does not mean I differ with KE because I don't believe the FAA Reps in what they told AMA. I do believe they passed a good Hint to AMA about how to proceed. OTOH you never know just what they report when they report on the meeting.
I also feel exactly as KidEpoxy does when he stated:
"Looks to me FAA is telling AMA exactly what to do for AMA to exempt itself from practically all restrictions,
but that AMA has better things to do than follow FAA's instructions."
In my 28 years of dealing with FAA, whenever they determined a need for dealing, I have very little confidence in anything they might say, until after the fact. They are a government entity, therefore they go the easiest route which promotes their own self well-being.
My own experiences include criminal charges by FAA which were thrown out of the first court, and not allowed in a Federal District Court when the FAA tried to appeal a previous Not Guilty because, "....no crime exists..." as determined by the judge.
Having survived six-consecutive audits in a row, six calendar years, at one time past, I rather believe the IRS than the FAA.
Edited to add: That does not mean I differ with KE because I don't believe the FAA Reps in what they told AMA. I do believe they passed a good Hint to AMA about how to proceed. OTOH you never know just what they report when they report on the meeting.
03-11-2010, 02:11 PM
#27
RE: AMA EC Minutes Jan. 23 2010 (FAA INFO)
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
Looks to me FAA is telling AMA exactly what to do for AMA to exempt itself from practically all restrictions,
but that AMA has better things to do than follow FAAs instructions.
Looks to me FAA is telling AMA exactly what to do for AMA to exempt itself from practically all restrictions,
but that AMA has better things to do than follow FAAs instructions.
12-10-2019, 05:50 PM
#29
My Feedback: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: ViennaVirginia
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Orginal FAA - AMA Standards Effort
Years on, I have to say that the boat was missed. In fact. The guys from the faa were leaning as far forward as they legally could. The ama and faa worked very closely to develop a safety standard that was very good. Ama put an extensive amount of energy and resoures into the effort. They worked it to 95% +/-. Hats off to that group. Unfortunately other government powers were approached and the effort never proceeded. The not written future had some uncertanty. And as that path didnt continue, we cant know if the FAA would have accepted the stanadard - I think there was a very high probablity that it would have been accepted had it been completed. All participants in the effort should be thanked for pushing forward. The AMA president at the time was very supportive, as was the AMA gov rep and current president.
PlaneJames
PlaneJames
Last edited by PlaneJames; 12-10-2019 at 05:53 PM. Reason: Spelling
