Sender: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:26:46 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-531136@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.34; envelope-from=sportform@cox.net
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
In-Reply-To: <list-530768@logan.com>
References: <list-530768@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Barry Hancock <sportform@cox.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] VFR for flight testing


On Nov 13, 2004, at 9:38 AM, Ron Galbraith wrote:

>  Guess there are new folks at the FISDO's that don't research the past 
> very well.

HA!  Flight Standards District Office, I can think of better names for 
them.  There is nothing "standard" about these regional offices that a) 
interpret the same regulations as many different ways as there are 
regions, b) don't even know their own darned regulations, c) interpret 
as they see fit, regardless of the rule of law or individuals rights, 
d) can even provide the services our tax dollars are allocated for, so 
we have to hire DAR's to do their jobs, and e) generally try to insult 
our intelligence and throw their weight around because they know 
there's no reasonable recourse against them.

Yes, there are exceptions, but having certified several aircraft in the 
Experimental Exhibition category in the LA basin, I can tell that your 
above statement only begins to scratch the surface of the problems with 
this bureaucracy....