"The FAA said it took the action to 'prevent operators from broadly offering their aircraft for joyrides and other similar experiences under the guise of “flight training.”’”
Four points:
So now Though Crime is part of the FAR’s? It doesn’t matter if you’re really a CFI and really giving (some) Instruction? What matters is if you REALLY meant it?
As someone else above pointed out, wouldn’t an Introductory Flight fail this Thought Crime test? I used to give Introductory Flights. Sometimes they were Birthday Presents, just a Joy Ride. I was light on the instruction. Once in the air, I would show them how to steer (forgoing instruction on Ruder and Trim) and let them drive around looking at their home or something, since it was clear that I would never see them again. (They didn’t even buy a log book that I could make an entry in.)
Even worse, I had “students” (in fact a lawyer once) who used me to fly on business. That is, on a first flight they wanted to do a Cross Country (more than 25 miles), wait on them for an hour or two, then fly back home. I suppose the FAA would Thought Crime this as conducting a Part 135 Operation. But, hey, I gave them instruction along the way. And they were safe. (The planes had 100 hr inspections.) So what? (I will explain the “So What” in Point # 4.)
Liberals never want us to have too much fun. (Or Innovate.)
Ironically, think about all the people who would have taken a Joy Ride/Instruction in a Warbird and would have wanted to become pilots afterward. Now they won’t.
But more to the point, How was this a problem/safely issue/protecting the public? Ans: It wasn’t.
Which brings up the real heart of the matter: Whose ox was gored here? Someone had to have complained to the FAA. (Hey, AvWeb, how about making a FOIA request?) Probably a local flight school who felt that business was being taken away from them.
Now if we can just get congress to fire every FAA employee at the FSDOs who use the excuse of COVID to not answer phone calls, or e-mails or do ANY work for the flying public! I’m fed up with these government bureaucrats who have been on a nice vacation at OUR expense! Just try calling your local FSDO and you’ll see what I mean.
I was incorrect on the post above I think page 11 says it…
valid registrations in effect on the date of this
direct final rule will be extended such that the total term of registration will be seven
years from the date of issuance of the currently valid renewal, notwithstanding the
expiration date on the Certificate of Aircraft Registration.
Suspect the short 3-year period was intended to expedite the initial purge of ghost registrations. Once established, government decisions, rules & procedures are rarely reevaluated without outside pressure.
So are they going reissue existing registration cards with the corrected date that will coincide with a seven year period. If not it’s going to cause confusion when crossing the border (northern and southern) if the paper cert with the original 3 year date shows it’s expired but it’s actually still valid…