"Bart" wrote in :

With all the heated debate over trival issues that I've seen in this
newsgroup, I have to say I'm really disappointed with what I'm seeing
as response to a real issue that affects the value of operating a
helicopter in the US.

Maybe you guys don't understand the impact of the proposed rule
change. Here's what they're doing if it passes, this applies to all
121,135, and 91 operators:

No, it does not apply to all operators. Don't lie about it just to scare
people.

* You'll be requred to fly at or above 1500 AGL during non takeoff and
landing phases

No, you won't. Helicopters can still go down to 300', which IMO is too low
anyway.

* You'll be required to have pop-out floats for overwater flights.

So? You should have them if you're carrying fare-paying passengers over
water. If you don't, you're negligent.

* Regardless of the airspace, you'll have to have cloud clearance of
500 below, 1000 above, and 2000 lateral,. as well as maintaining an
1200 ft AGL alt.

For tours, I don't see the problem. It is draconian, but trying to show
the sights in low visibility is stupid anyway. This ONLY applies to tour
operations, which have a poor record in poor weather.

* Gone is the ability to operate "without hazard to persons or
property", You'll be required to maintain airplane-like standoff
distances.

Not true.

* Operation within the H/V curve, regardless of flight phase is
prohibited, (IE: NO max performance or confined area departures /
appches. )

Again, not true. Takeoff and landing are excepted. This only prohibits
hovering inside volcanoes, etc, which has been killing innocent passengers.

Basically stated; The FAA will be removing any reason that you would
want to operate a helicopter vs. an airplane.

You're full of it. All this just is not true.

If you care about this at all, please voice your opinion at:
http://www1.faa.gov/avr/arm/forum/Hy...uctorypage.htm

My opinion is that this NPRM is far overdue.

--
Regards,

Stan