New TSA Rule

[NW_PILOT]

I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
raise the instruction rates?

[Peter Duniho]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
>I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
> raise the instruction rates?

"Excuse"? I would be surprised if rates did NOT increase, or at least if
there was not a new surcharge for doing the required background check,
simply for the reason that it DOES cost more money to comply with the new
rules.

I suppose you might call that an "excuse", but it's not like the flight
schools are going to make a profit on the rule.

Pete

[Jim Burns]

A better question would be "I wonder how many independent CFI's will say
"screw it" and give up instructing. Like myself, most of the CFI's that I
know are not trying to build time, they instruct on a part time basis in
addition to a full time career, usually in a non-aviation area. They
volunteer their time at the local airport willing to do what it takes to
introduce new pilots to aviation, barely making enough to keep change for
the vending machines in their pockets. Just how much nonsense are we going
to put up with? Only time will tell.


"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
> raise the instruction rates?
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004

[Peter MacPherson]

These are exactly my thoughts. I do this part time because I like to
fly and I like to teach. But at some point all of this nonsense and
hoops you're supposed to jump through will become too much.
Are we supposed to live in fear that we'll get a letter from the TSA/FAA
telling us that we violated some obscure reg and we're now having our
certificates revoked/suspended and also have to pay a fine. I see part time
CFI's just walking away. A real shame.



"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
>A better question would be "I wonder how many independent CFI's will say
> "screw it" and give up instructing. Like myself, most of the CFI's that I
> know are not trying to build time, they instruct on a part time basis in
> addition to a full time career, usually in a non-aviation area. They
> volunteer their time at the local airport willing to do what it takes to
> introduce new pilots to aviation, barely making enough to keep change for
> the vending machines in their pockets. Just how much nonsense are we
> going
> to put up with? Only time will tell.
>

[zatatime]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:49:21 GMT, "Peter MacPherson"
> wrote:

> I see part time
>CFI's just walking away. A real shame.

Something I'm considering.

If they made the recurrent training every two years to coincide with
CFI renewal, it would help a little bit, but I doubt they'd be
inclined to adjust for that.

We'll see how it shakes out,,,,

z

[OtisWinslow]

I've thought that when I can retire in another 9 yrs or so that
I'd renew my CFI certificate and teach for the fun of it and to
give something back to aviation. I've come to the conclusion that
this wouldn't be something I will able to afford to do given all the
stuff continually being piled on and the insurance requirements
needed to protect myself.


"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
>A better question would be "I wonder how many independent CFI's will say
> "screw it" and give up instructing. Like myself, most of the CFI's that I
> know are not trying to build time, they instruct on a part time basis in
> addition to a full time career, usually in a non-aviation area. They
> volunteer their time at the local airport willing to do what it takes to
> introduce new pilots to aviation, barely making enough to keep change for
> the vending machines in their pockets. Just how much nonsense are we
> going
> to put up with? Only time will tell.
>
>
> "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
>> raise the instruction rates?
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

NW_PILOT wrote:
>
> I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
> raise the instruction rates?

That's not an "excuse"; that's a reason.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
>A better question would be "I wonder how many independent CFI's will say
> "screw it" and give up instructing.

Interesting you mention that. I'm in a somewhat unique situation, having
started work on my flight instructor certificate just before my son was
born, and now (having put that work on hold for awhile, as I enjoy being a
dad and have lots of other distractions as well) I'm wondering if I should
even bother finishing up getting my flight instructor certificate.

I thought about mentioning that in response to this thread, but decided not
to, figuring my situation was so uncommon as to be irrelevant. But you're
right...there are plenty of people *already* flight instructors who may also
just give it up.

I have a hard enough time fighting various regulations that try to simply
prevent me from flying altogether. It is becoming increasingly difficult
for me to justify jumping through all the ridiculous hoops required to go
beyond my private-pilot oriented activities. Frankly, I've got plenty of
other interests to keep me busy, and some of those will help pay for my
regular flying a lot better than instructing would. I'm sure I'd enjoy the
instructing part of instructing, but when the job winds up being too much
non-instructing stuff, it's just not worth it.

So, you ask "Just how much nonsense are we going to put up with?" Well,
personally, I've had just about my fill. I think I'm about done...I love
flying, but in this environment it's difficult to justify the headaches.

Pete

[BTIZ]

the only "cost" to the new Rule for an FBO is to see, copy and maintain a
file for proof of US Cit.

how many FBOs country wide have to deal with foreign nationals or green card
holders.

BT

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I am wondering if the larger FBO's are going to use this is an excuse to
>> raise the instruction rates?
>
> "Excuse"? I would be surprised if rates did NOT increase, or at least if
> there was not a new surcharge for doing the required background check,
> simply for the reason that it DOES cost more money to comply with the new
> rules.
>
> I suppose you might call that an "excuse", but it's not like the flight
> schools are going to make a profit on the rule.
>
> Pete
>

[NW_PILOT]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:vDCdd.34288$bk1.32137@fed1read05...
> the only "cost" to the new Rule for an FBO is to see, copy and maintain a
> file for proof of US Cit.
>
> how many FBOs country wide have to deal with foreign nationals or green
card
> holders.
>
> BT

I don't think many will and the ones that I have seen in the magazine's that
deal with foreign nationals or green card holders specialize in it. Every
FBO around here that I have dealt with takes a photo of your Drivers
License, Medical, and Other things prior to aircraft rental and/or
instruction.

For an FBO to add a birth certificate, passport, ect. in the mix of
paperwork it cost's a whopping nickel if a passport may not cost any extra
as they are small and probably every thing will fit on a single sheet of
paper. Paper and a photo copy machine is a cost of doing business and can be
written off as an business expense.

[Jose]

Maybe if enough CFIs toss it in, the remaining ones could charge more, flying would become more expensive, fewer people will go for advanced ratings (such as ATP) in the United States, and eventually, the airlines will all be flown by foreigners.

But you'll feel safer knowing there are no little airplanes flying any more.

Jose

[Jose]

> .... and can't you just imagine the TSA's response?
>
> <sarcasm on>
> I think they'll be proud....
>
> "As a result of new security measures...

That was scary enough that I googled it to be sure it wasn't already true.

Jose

[Peter Duniho]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> I'll still vote for [snipped...]

I have no idea how this thread got to be a "I'm voting for <lame candidate
of your choice here>" thread. But if you thought that's what I was talking
about, you seriously misinterpreted what I wrote.

> [...] That seems to be about as logical
> of a reason as criticizing him for things he had no control over.

No one's done that. Not here in this thread, least of all me. Seems like
you're a little over-sensitive about that topic. I wonder why...

[Jim Burns]

..... and can't you just imagine the TSA's response?

<sarcasm on>
I think they'll be proud....

"As a result of new security measures, the Transportation Safety
Administration has brought regulation, supervision, and security to a
potentially dangerous and formerly unmonitored segment of this nations
transportation system. Under the new TSA Rules, the number of FAA Certified
Flight Instructors acting independently, not affiliated, supervised, or
regulated by a major flight training center or organization, has been
dramatically reduced. Many of these part time instructors where not
employed by an officially recognized flight school or training center, but
where independent part time freelancers able to teach any individual,
foreign or domestic, legal or illegal, how to fly. The majority of these
independent Flight Instructors acted as such purely on a part time basis and
held full time positions in other occupations, again most of which were not
even aviation related. Most of these independent instructors spent very
little time actually at the airport, some only a few hours a week. Clearly
these individual instructors are unable to monitor the daily security
concerns that this Administration feels need to be closely attended to. We
believe that educating pilots belongs solely in the hands of professional
full time instructors that can monitor the safety and security of this
nation's aircraft, airports, and the citizens of surrounding communities.
We believe this to be a major step forward in the war against terrorism. No
longer can just any instructor certified by the FAA pick up new customers
out of the taverns, street corners, and back alleys, with little concern for
the security or safety of these United States, and proceed to put that
individual in the captain's seat of an airliner ready to carry hundreds of
people to their death. This is clearly a safer and better day for the
citizens of the United States of America!"

<sarcasm off>

I'll still vote for Bush. Under his Administration I've been able to get my
Commercial certificate, my AGI, IGI, CFI, CFII, Multi-rating, bought an
airplane and even paid for it. All on a part time basis while farming full
time and not even going broke doing it. That seems to be about as logical
of a reason as criticizing him for things he had no control over.

Jim

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Burns" > wrote in message
> ...
> >A better question would be "I wonder how many independent CFI's will say
> > "screw it" and give up instructing.
>
> Interesting you mention that. I'm in a somewhat unique situation, having
> started work on my flight instructor certificate just before my son was
> born, and now (having put that work on hold for awhile, as I enjoy being a
> dad and have lots of other distractions as well) I'm wondering if I should
> even bother finishing up getting my flight instructor certificate.
>
> I thought about mentioning that in response to this thread, but decided
not
> to, figuring my situation was so uncommon as to be irrelevant. But you're
> right...there are plenty of people *already* flight instructors who may
also
> just give it up.
>
> I have a hard enough time fighting various regulations that try to simply
> prevent me from flying altogether. It is becoming increasingly difficult
> for me to justify jumping through all the ridiculous hoops required to go
> beyond my private-pilot oriented activities. Frankly, I've got plenty of
> other interests to keep me busy, and some of those will help pay for my
> regular flying a lot better than instructing would. I'm sure I'd enjoy
the
> instructing part of instructing, but when the job winds up being too much
> non-instructing stuff, it's just not worth it.
>
> So, you ask "Just how much nonsense are we going to put up with?" Well,
> personally, I've had just about my fill. I think I'm about done...I love
> flying, but in this environment it's difficult to justify the headaches.
>
> Pete
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.774 / Virus Database: 521 - Release Date: 10/7/2004

[Jim Burns]

I wasn't responding directly to your post, sorry. I'm frustrated with the
whole mess just like you are. My political comments were a not too clearly
explained comparison and after thought of how screwed up the TSA mess has
become with how ridiculous the campaigning has become. It should have came
out more along the lines of "just how much do they think we'll believe and
put up with".
Jim

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Burns" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I'll still vote for [snipped...]
>
> I have no idea how this thread got to be a "I'm voting for <lame candidate
> of your choice here>" thread. But if you thought that's what I was
talking
> about, you seriously misinterpreted what I wrote.
>
> > [...] That seems to be about as logical
> > of a reason as criticizing him for things he had no control over.
>
> No one's done that. Not here in this thread, least of all me. Seems like
> you're a little over-sensitive about that topic. I wonder why...
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.774 / Virus Database: 521 - Release Date: 10/7/2004

[David Brooks]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:vDCdd.34288$bk1.32137@fed1read05...
> the only "cost" to the new Rule for an FBO is to see, copy and maintain a
> file for proof of US Cit.
>
> how many FBOs country wide have to deal with foreign nationals or green
card
> holders.

I'd guess the ones who don't would be an anomaly. Remember there are over 11
million green card holders alone, and according to AOPA they are 13% of the
pilot population.


-- David Brooks

[Chris]

"Jose" > wrote in message
. com...
> Maybe if enough CFIs toss it in, the remaining ones could charge more,
> flying would become more expensive, fewer people will go for advanced
> ratings (such as ATP) in the United States, and eventually, the airlines
> will all be flown by foreigners.
>
> But you'll feel safer knowing there are no little airplanes flying any
> more.
>
> Jose

The foreigners who normally learn in the US will not be able to either so
the airlines just wont fly.

[Jose]

> The foreigners who normally learn in the US will not be able to either so
> the airlines just wont fly.

Oh, sorry, I forgot. The US is the only place where one can learn to fly.

Silly me.

Jose

[Blueskies]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message ...
>I wasn't responding directly to your post, sorry. I'm frustrated with the
> whole mess just like you are. My political comments were a not too clearly
> explained comparison and after thought of how screwed up the TSA mess has
> become with how ridiculous the campaigning has become. It should have came
> out more along the lines of "just how much do they think we'll believe and
> put up with".
> Jim
>
> "Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Jim Burns" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > I'll still vote for [snipped...]
>>
>> I have no idea how this thread got to be a "I'm voting for <lame candidate
>> of your choice here>" thread. But if you thought that's what I was
> talking
>> about, you seriously misinterpreted what I wrote.
>>
>> > [...] That seems to be about as logical
>> > of a reason as criticizing him for things he had no control over.
>>
>> No one's done that. Not here in this thread, least of all me. Seems like
>> you're a little over-sensitive about that topic. I wonder why...
>>
>>

The terrorists just keep on winning and winning. They don't even have to do anything, the vortex of fear stirred by
politicians is enough to keep it going...