Flexibility is good. Better yet would be for the government to remove itself entirely and free markets will work this out. What company would make a product designed to harm its users? Doing nothing is never considered when the government feels the urge to intervene. On this issue it’s irrelevant since there is no real demand for these coal-powered flivvers. In five years they will have been forgotten, just like the Terrafugias and other flying car belly flops. Pity is all the tax dollars wasted on this stuff. Anyone heard of “lost opportunity costs”?
Bet you the “special procedures” last as long as the first crash. After that it will be the full 737 Max plus a bit…
Lawyers must be loving it.
G100UL was done just a few days after Paul’s video came out.
Somebody needs to take the Uber approach and just start flying things around. Break all the rules, get public support from whinging young people, and start making money for Wall Street.
I can’t believe those jerks got away with it, but it seems they found the only effective way to fight government oppression. I guess it’s an age thing because I grew up clueless, had a brief grasp on the way things work (perhaps illusory), and now I fade back into cluelessness.
Funny thing, Uber itself is now an institution and can’t do it again. I know that much.
Electric taxis that have charge for 10 minutes at best. Wonder who has the balls or the lack of common sense to fly in these coffins. Rubber bands may be a more environmental solution than the batteries.
If there “is room in the regs for new technologies”, why did it take 11 years to approve G100 UL? It’s a little hard to believe her, knowing the FAA’s history.
There will be “flexibility” in approvals after the 737 MAX debacle? Seriously?