and so it continues - proposed rule on renewing aircraft registration

[Bob Noel]

new proposed rule in today's federal register

(watch the linewrap)

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008
/E8-3822.htm

It would appear that the FAA wants to make the aircraft registration certificate
invalid if the registration hasn't been properly renewed in the last three years.
And, of course, they want to charge a "fairer" cost for this "service."

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[John Godwin[_2_]]

Bob Noel > wrote in
:

> (watch the linewrap)
>
> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gp
> o.gov/2008 /E8-3822.htm

Better yet:

http://tinyurl.com/334pu6

[Robert M. Gary]

On Feb 28, 4:32*am, Bob Noel >
wrote:
> new proposed rule in today's federal register
>
> (watch the linewrap)
>
> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access....
>
> It would appear that the FAA wants to make the aircraft registration certificate
> invalid if the registration hasn't been properly renewed in the last three years.
> And, of course, they want to charge a "fairer" cost for this "service."
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> (goodness, please trim replies!!!)

The next step will probably be a SMOG test.

-Robert

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Bob Noel" > wrote

> new proposed rule in today's federal register
> It would appear that the FAA wants to make the aircraft registration
> certificate
> invalid if the registration hasn't been properly renewed in the last three
> years.
> And, of course, they want to charge a "fairer" cost for this "service."

What a continuing crock of crap, driven by the "feel good" people in the
gubermint.

It reminds me of the trend for tighter gun control laws, and the gauntlet
that law abiding citizens must run to purchase and own guns.

The problem is that when nobody is allowed to have guns, only the criminals
will have guns, and they will be unregistered, I guarantee. (please don't
take this thread down the gun control direction; it was only used as a
comparison) Same result with the attempt to get all airplane registrations
current, so they will know who the terrorists and drug smugglers are, and
what they are flying.

Do they really think that the people trying to dodge the law will not be
able to find a way to fly without current registration?

Give me a break, or a brake, or something!

And what's the deal with "five thousand" pages of legaleeze to publish a
simple concept? I guess they think people will not bother to wade through
it, to see what it is really about.
--
Jim in NC

[Robert M. Gary]

On Feb 28, 2:54*pm, "Morgans" > wrote:
> "Bob Noel" > wrote
>
> > new proposed rule in today's federal register
> > It would appear that the FAA wants to make the aircraft registration
> > certificate
> > invalid if the registration hasn't been properly renewed in the last three
> > years.
> > And, of course, they want to charge a "fairer" cost for this "service."
>
> *What a continuing crock of crap, driven by the "feel good" people in the
> gubermint.

I'm sitting here watching Dr. Zhivago again. Remember that the
Communist Party in Russia was started by people who wanted to do good
and the best for everyone (doing the whole Robin Hood thing). Good
intentitions are clearly not sufficient.

-robert

[Denny]

>
> I'm sitting here watching Dr. Zhivago again. Remember that the
> Communist Party in Russia was started by people who wanted to do good
> and the best for everyone (doing the whole Robin Hood thing). Good
> intentitions are clearly not sufficient.
>
> -robert

Unfortunately, historical fact do not bear out that hollywood
fantasy... Lenin, Trostky, et. al., caused and led a civil war that
killed and/or starved millions - including murdering the Romanovs
right down to helpless children - so they could be in power, and
Stalin was a thug who murdered his way to power, and then murdered
tens of millions of Russians to keep that power ... Good intentions
were never an issue...

denny

[Robert M. Gary]

On Feb 29, 4:32*am, Denny > wrote:
> > I'm sitting here watching Dr. Zhivago again. Remember that the
> > Communist Party in Russia was started by people who wanted to do good
> > and the best for everyone (doing the whole Robin Hood thing). Good
> > intentitions are clearly not sufficient.
>
> > -robert
>
> Unfortunately, historical fact do not bear out that hollywood
> fantasy... Lenin, Trostky, et. al., caused and led a civil war that
> killed and/or starved millions - including murdering the Romanovs
> right down to helpless children - so they could be in power, and
> Stalin was a thug who murdered his way to power, and then murdered
> tens of millions of Russians to keep that power ... *Good intentions
> were never an issue...

Absolute power always corrupts but millions of Russians didn't support
the reds because they wanted Trostky to be powerful. They honestly
believed in the left-wing agenda, that society should elevate the
poorest on the backs of the richest and that taking property is ok in
the name of the good of the masses. Those intentions were good and
those people didn't know any better. I'm not sure what today's left-
wingers excuse is though (perhaps they missed history).

-Robert

[Blueskies]

"John Godwin" > wrote in message ...
> Bob Noel > wrote in
> :
>
>> (watch the linewrap)
>>
>> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gp
>> o.gov/2008 /E8-3822.htm
>
> Better yet:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/334pu6

WOW...amazing the problems a bureaucracy can breed...

Tasty tidbits...

With almost one-third of the aircraft on the register having a
questionable registration status, it is clear that the needed accuracy
and currency of aircraft registration data cannot be met with the
present system of indefinite-duration Certificates that relies
primarily on aircraft owners to report address changes, aircraft sales,
aircraft destruction, or loss of registration eligibility. The FAA
believes that limiting the duration of a Certificate would be the most
effective method of increasing the accuracy of its records. Thus, the
FAA, seeking to meet current and future needs, proposes in this NPRM:
.....
Under 14 CFR 47.17, we currently charge $5.00 for obtaining a
certificate of aircraft registration and would charge the same amount
for a renewal registration under this proposal. However, the FAA is
pursuing fairer, more cost-based funding for the future. One of the
FAA's goals for its pending reauthorization is to match FAA funding
more closely with the costs of providing services. Current FAA funding
does not align with FAA's costs to provide services, and the current
aircraft registration fee, which has been $5.00 since the mid-1960's,
is an example of this disconnect. To move the FAA to a more cost-based
organization, the Administration's proposal for FAA reauthorization,
sent to Congress in February 2007, includes language that addresses
registration and certification fees across the board. The House of
Representatives adopted much of the Administration's proposal for these
fees in H.R. 2881, which passed the House in September 2007. Once the
outcome of the reauthorization legislation is known, the FAA will
decide whether additional action is necessary through either further
legislation or rulemaking.
.....
Presently about 35% of registered aircraft are operating on
potentially ineffective registrations, because the Registry has not
been notified of registration changes. With the implementation of the
proposed 3-year renewal, according to the analysis provided in the
preliminary Regulatory Evaluation (a copy of which has been placed in
the docket for this rulemaking), we estimate that the inaccuracy rate
would drop to about 5.6% of the 240,000 aircraft expected to remain on
the register. By comparison, a 5-year renewal interval would likely
result in an error rate of about 12.5%, and a 7-year renewal interval
would result in an error rate of about 21.8%. Even under the 3-year
renewal interval, avoiding data degradation due to registration
information changes would depend upon aircraft owners reporting all
changes in a timely manner.
....
The FAA recommends
application be made at least 45 days before the end of the 3-month
period. This scheduling, as shown by these sample dates, is necessary
to manage the Registry's workload during the re-registration period.
....
There are currently about 17,000 aircraft (out of over 340,000)
whose status is ``sale reported.'' Of these, about 15,900 have been in
the ``sale reported'' category for more than 6 months, according to the
preliminary Regulatory Evaluation. In these cases, FAA has received
notice of a sale from the last registered owner, but no Application has
been filed, and the aircraft has not been registered to the new owner.
Historically, there have been approximately 17,000 ``sale reported''
aircraft at any given time. Many of the aircraft that were originally
placed in this short-term category have remained there for more than
two decades.

[LWG]

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose...

<They honestly
<believed in the left-wing agenda, that society should elevate the
<poorest on the backs of the richest and that taking property is ok in
<the name of the good of the masses. Those intentions were good and
<those people didn't know any better.

[Blueskies]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message ...
>
> "John Godwin" > wrote in message ...
>> Bob Noel > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> (watch the linewrap)
>>>
>>> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gp
>>> o.gov/2008 /E8-3822.htm
>>
>> Better yet:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/334pu6
>
> WOW...amazing the problems a bureaucracy can breed...
>

We have so many 'laws' and 'regulations' in this US of A, many are non-enforceable and selectively enforced.