What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION!

Status
Not open for further replies.
GREAT NEWS----------

We all need to write our employees in Washington and direct them to support this action.
 
I just received the email from AOPA and came on here to post that link..

This makes the 30+ years of AOPA dues worth the cost!
 
Now all RVs are included as opposed to just those below 180 HP.
I had heard they were going to go the route of legislation and force the FAA to do something. Excellent move.
 
HR Number?

Maybe I missed it but I would like to have an HR Number to include into my letters and e-mails to my representatives. Thanks.
 
Maybe I missed it but I would like to have an HR Number to include into my letters and e-mails to my representatives. Thanks.

I could not find one, so I just included the authors names, and title of the bill when I wrote my Rep.
 
I wonder how many of us it actually benefits given the IFR limitation.
It benefits everyone that flies. It will never cover everyone since a line has to be defined. Where it benefits all is it puts notice to the FAA that over regulation and unnecessary costs can be challenged in many ways. Legislation is unfortunate but if passed will force them to comply.
 
If they really wanted to do something significant for Sport and General Aviation, they would force the FAA to do something about that ridiculous 1320 MTOW limit, like raising it to something that would allow all those 152s and similar aircraft to qualify as LSA.

That would do more to open up aviation and drive down costs than just about anything.
 
I didn't see anything about HP ratings. I do not understand the 14000' restriction but will live with it here in the flatlands. (There are times in Colorado when I would like to go higher.) Wish the IFR restriction was removed.

Anyway, it's a great start. I like it!
 
General Aviation Pilot Protection Act

I sent my representative an email today asking him to review the Act and join Congressmen Rokita and Graves in support of passing this bill.

Increasing pilot population will stimulate the aviation industry in the form of new jobs and production.

Let your rep(s) know!!
 
YES!

Bob, thanks for the heads up. I will write everyone of the members I know. Finally, we are taking away the assumed power the FAA thinks they have. They went too far with the sleep apnea and sitting on the request from EAA and AOPA for this exact proposal.

This is great.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I sent my representative an email today asking him to review the Act and join Congressmen Rokita and Graves in support of passing this bill.

Increasing pilot population will stimulate the aviation industry in the form of new jobs and production.

Let your rep(s) know!!

Just finished doing that myself!
 
It's a good start.
Is there any logic to the no-IFR and no-above 14,000' restrictions?

I guess they picked the O2 required level as a max.

Much better than the original 10,000 ft max of the original AOPA/EAA proposal and LSA Sport Pilot requirements.
 
VFR Only

While I support any step in this direction there is one thing missing....IFR flight. The proposal is for VFR. When writing your representatives, be sure to ask them to include IFR flying as well.
 
Good Start!

I agree and fully support the request for IFR and up to 18,000 feet. As a practical matter, we're almost there so why not include it?? But, and it's a big BUT here, if this is all we can get now let's grab it. Then keep requesting for the increase.

I'm going to work hard to press all this. I face a dilemma. I'm in good standing with my Senators; but think my emails are blocked by my congressman. This past year, I regret to say I've called him everything but "sweetheart". :eek: Hmmm, maybe if promise to retract all I've said in exchange for his supporting vote.....??? Nah!!, I'm toast in his eyes.

...I know, borrow a friends name & address to write my letters; AND urge every family member/friend and anyone who'll talk to me to press the issue with him. That's it, pressing ahead. :D

Good luck to us all and happy for this positive development,
 
I sent a letter (real one, not even an email) to my rep last night in support of this.

I'd like to see the VFR bit removed too, but at least it's not DAY VFR only like Sport Pilot. That is a more severe limitation and it's what has me debating whether to even bother building a 12 right now. Am I really willing to spend a couple of years and upwards of $75K building an airplane I can only fly during daylight hours? Not this week. But... with a 14K MSL/250Kt limit and night flying, I'm back in business.
 
I sure hope those are generic numbers. I personally know two on the transportation committee. If anyone has connections, now is the time to use them.

Wow.. That is depressing.

Prognosis 14% chance of getting past committee.
3% chance of being enacted.
 
Wow.. That is depressing.

Prognosis 14% chance of getting past committee.
3% chance of being enacted.

Don't get depressed - rejoice! What that says is 97% of legislation doesn't make it - which is probably great for all us - I think it was Jefferson who said something to the effect that liberty was only in jeopardy when Congress was in session.

Now the odds here seem generic and this isn't a lottery where we can't beat the odds. If your congressmen know there's widespread support for the Bill, it will become law. This Bill should have bi-partisan support and I can see where a strong majority could be formed that would skew these odds significantly.

It's time to push hard to make this happen. I'm not just writing my representatives, I'm planning to meet with at least one, if not all of them (locally not in Washington). I'm also exploring inviting one to our local pilots association meeting so he can meet 30 or so folks who strongly support the Bill. I may push to get other airmen friends at airports in other districts to do this too. I encourage everyone to invite your representatives to come to your public use airport and meet pilots, family and friends, who support this.

Politicians live and die on votes. 16,000 people cared enough to comment on the original FAA proposal that got shelved. If 16,000 people actually took the time nationwide (320 per state on average), this thing would sail through Congress - and that's not optimism. The question is whether 6 or 8 people per state will invite their Congressman to a meeting at their local airport to talk about the Bill.

This is where the EAA could (and I hope they will) become an effective lobbying machine. Headquarters could encourage and enable local chapter leaders to organize these meetings and get as many pilots to attend as possible - and family members that vote and support GA, too. I think the AOPA could lend support to EAA chapters by supporting these sorts of meetings.

This Bill shouldn't be controversial like health care reform, gun control, balancing the budget, or a host of other topics that have rabid voices on both sides of the issue. This is a benign topic where a legislator can support their local constituents - nary a single party platform has ever mentioned support or opposition to the 3rd Class Medical for airman. Both parties will support aviation safety and rational regulations. This basically means Democrats, Republicans, and Tea Party members of Congress should all be able to support this.

For all of these reasons, I think they odds shown on that website under estimate this specific Bill's chances of passing. But, don't be complacent. Act to garner the support of your congressman - don't just write - meet with them personally and set up public meetings that they will be comfortable hearing your comments and supporting them. Remember - they live and die by the vote and pilots have a lot of votes they want.
 
I spent a good part of the morning getting in touch with the sponsors and co-sponsors of HR-3708. It's not possible to send E mails via their contacts when you are not in their District but a phone call to the offices explaining you want to send a complimentary note results in them sending you their office E mail. Your letter can then be forwarded to the Representative even if your'e not in his District. Most people respond well to an atta boy and these individuals should know how we appreciate their support.:)

Hans
 
Emailed my representative today. Waiting to see if this passes will be worse than waiting for Christmas to open gifts as a kid!
 
Other Contacts

Some other relevant folks to contact could be the members of the approving committee.

Chairman: Bill Shuster (PA-R)
Ranking Member: Nick Rahall II (WV-D)
Chair, Subcommitte on Aviation: Frank Lobiondo (NJ-R)
 
Please watch the video towards the bottom of the page from the link below.

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/...rgized-over-drivers-license-medical-bill.aspx

It is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT that EVERY PERSON who reads this forum contact their congressman/congresswoman and express their need for them to cosponsor this bill. If you have never done this, now is the time to do it for the first time.

This is the single best piece of legislation will stop the downward spiral of GA that is currently happening. I predict it will double the number of active GA pilots which will have wide-ranging positive economic benefits for GA.

Talk to your local EAA chapter leadership and as someone else mentioned in this thread, set up a chapter meeting with your congressman and have anyone and their mother show up in support.
 
Last edited:
From AOPA

I wrote the following to AOPA.

Request:
Concerning the newly introduced " General Aviation Pilot Protection Act "

I have a couple questions.

1. What effect will this have on insurance rates if a pilot is flying on their drivers license instead of a medical?? I know, "Will" is something you can not determine, so what is the probable result??

2. I remember the huge feeling of betrayal felt by the pilot community after the Sport Pilot program was finally approved by the FAA----------hundreds if not thousands of pilots who has lost their medicals were tricked into supporting this thinking they would be allowed to fly once again with only a drivers license. Yet in the final cut, the Sport Pilot was limited to those who had not failed a medical, and all these pilots were thrown under the FAA's bus.

Is there any provisions in the current bill to prevent such a thing form happening again, also what is going to happen to the large group of pilots currently flying with a "Special Issuance" medical-----will they still be able to fly with only a drivers license, or are they going to get screwed out of this proposal??

I would like to see specific language in the proposed bill stating that it would apply to any pilot who holds or has held a 3rd class medical regardless of current medical status.

If the answers to these questions are not already known, please determine them, and publish the results for all members to see.

Thanks,
Mike Starkey

Today I got the following in response.

Hello Mike,

Thanks for contacting AOPA's Pilot Information Center.

You are right. It is too early to know the answers to many of the questions surrounding this proposed bill. Insurance is going to be a private issue, not regulatory. The insurance companies have been insuring sport pilots for the past 10 years, so I can only imagine that will continue. If it will affect rates, we can only guess at this point.

The wording of the proposed bill is still very vague. It will most likely change quite a bit before it passes. Currently it states

No later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administrator shall issue or revise medical certification regulations to ensure that an individual may operate as pilot in command of a covered aircraft without regard to any medical certification or proof of health requirement otherwise applicable under Federal Law if---

It continues to spell out the rules, but does not reference a denial of a medical. We are hopeful that this will include all of our members. It is too early to know how it will be worded in the end. We will be keeping everyone posted through our web site and online magazines.


Regards,

Brenda Tibbs | Aviation Technical Specialist
Pilot Information Center
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
Direct: 301-695-2141 or [email protected]
800-872-2672 or 301-695-2000 | www.aopa.org
 
I wrote the following to AOPA.

I have a couple questions.

Thoughtful questions Mike. I had wondered whether those denied a medical would be able to fly under this proposal, too. I believe it will be necessary to make this an explicit part of the Bill. Otherwise, I have no doubt that the FAA's legal team would insist on the same Sport Pilot rule that you can fly with a driver's license for a medical, unless you have been denied a medical in the past.

Can you imagine the FAA having rules less strict on PPL than on a SPL? Me neither. Too much inconsistency already.

Can you imagine the FAA dropping the restriction on Sport Pilots? Me neither.
 
Here is something to keep in mind if you have a SI medical:

"Is a Special Issuance considered denial of an application for an airman medical certificate?

Response by the Federal Air Surgeon
No. Special Issuance is not considered the denial of an FAA airman medical certificate."

This is off the FAA's website.
 
Words from a Congressman

I attended a town hall meeting last night and visited with Congressman James Lankford regarding the new bill. He stated that each pilot needs to contact their congressman and/or his staff and request their support simply because they cannot represent you if they don't know about it. Makes sense!

The bill will be sent to the appropriate committee (general aviation) for review. My congressman (and probably most of yours too) is not a member of that committee, but he talks to them when necessary.

So speak up!
 
Done

I attended a town hall meeting last night and visited with Congressman James Lankford regarding the new bill. He stated that each pilot needs to contact their congressman ---------

So speak up!

I contacted my Rep via his website email, and received the following.

"Dear Mr. Starkey:

Thank you for sharing your support for the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act.

Members of Congress study, debate, and ultimately vote on a wide range of issues on a daily basis. Your comments help me better represent you throughout this process. I hope you will continue to reach out in the future when there are other issues you would like to bring to my attention. Regarding your support for the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act, I will keep your perspective in mind should legislation on this issue be voted on by the House of Representatives.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts. Please don't hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this or any other issue.

Sincerely,
Tom."

Pretty wishywashy message, so here is my reply.

"Thank you ( or whatever staffer wrote it) for the response to my letter requesting your support for the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act. However, I notice you have not made any statement as to your support for the act--------support which is greatly needed if this is to pass.

Earlier this year, H.R. 1848, the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013 was signed into law, and was supported in the House by a vote of 410 to 0.

The Small Airplane Revitalization Act is only one half of the puzzle, it should make private aircraft more affordable, and more available to the flying public. This will be of benefit to the US economy as sales of aircraft and part should increase due to lower cost------------also fuel sales, and associated things like motel rentals, food sales, car rentals etc increase with greater activity in the general aviation community.

But there is a second part of the puzzle -------------- more aircraft availability will only become more aircraft sales and usage if the pilot community is expanded-----------and currently the pilot community is shrinking. The General Aviation Pilot Protection Act is vital to keeping the current level of pilots, and should work to also encourage new pilots to join the community.

More and cheaper planes, coupled with more pilots will equate to more general aviation activity---------and this will generate more economic growth in many fields, and of course these will also add $$ to the taxes collected by the various governmental entities.

Thank You,
Mike Starkey"

Hopefully not too harsh in criticizing his lack of commitment, and factual enough to gain his support.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top