Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:43 AM - Re: Re: (Jon Boede)
2. 09:36 AM - Re: Re: (Bill Geipel)
3. 09:53 AM - Re: Re: (Bill Geipel)
4. 11:00 AM - Re: Re: (delfin)
5. 11:59 AM - Re: Re: (John Fischer)
6. 01:20 PM - Re: Re: (Bill Geipel)
7. 01:22 PM - Re: Re: (Bill Geipel)
8. 01:37 PM - Re: Re: (delfin)
9. 05:11 PM - Re: Re: (David)
10. 05:16 PM - Re: Re: (David)
11. 07:42 PM - Re: Re: (Colyergreg@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching? Appare
ntly not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the country divi
ded by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employment Act of 2
012".
I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting ready
for a checkride gives me=2C but locating an examiner and getting their sch
edule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
From: colyergreg@aol.com
Yea=2C as of now it's an examiner....
Greg415-531-0970www.AceMakerAirshows.com
On Jan 2=2C 2012=2C at 2:13 PM=2C delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:
Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can gi
ve dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement. I
will be looking forward to more info . thanks
From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
Sent: Monday=2C January 2=2C 2012 4:04 PM
Subject: L29-List: Re:
Bob=2C
I have called and sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No answ
er. Of course with Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road=2C it
may take awhile. It will count as a BFR.
In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
Merry Christmas=2C happy new year=2C blue sky's =2C smooth sailing=2C follo
wing seas & fair winds.
That should cover everyone.
Bill
On Jan 2=2C 2012=2C at 2:46 PM=2C delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clarify the new regu
lation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to carry passenger
s in the jets. What constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any
instructor that can give dual in the L-29=2C or a examiner that can give a
type rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type also. Can Bill o
r someone please clarify what exactly needs to take place. Also=2C does thi
s ride also act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
Bob Schwartz
=========
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago I talked with the guy i
n charge of designee examiners. I explained that
It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type ride. H
is response, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.
You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference. You can ima
gine how that went. He said we have
Plenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took place prior to th
e new rule.
I called the Administrators office, no answer.
Still trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.
Bill
On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching? Appar
ently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the country divi
ded by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employment Act of 20
12".
>
> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting read
y for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting their sched
ule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>
> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
> From: colyergreg@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
> To: l29-list@matronics.com
>
> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>
>
> Greg
> 415-531-0970
> www.AceMakerAirshows.com
>
> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can g
ive dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement. I
will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>
> From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
> To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
> Subject: L29-List: Re:
>
> Bob,
> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No ans
wer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road, it ma
y take awhile. It will count as a BFR.
> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>
> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following se
as & fair winds.
> That should cover everyone.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clarify the new reg
ulation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to carry passenger
s in the jets. What constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any i
nstructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a type
rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type also. Can Bill or som
eone please clarify what exactly needs to take place. Also, does this ride a
lso act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
>
>
> Bob Schwartz
>
>
>
> =========
> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
> =========
> cs.com
> =========
> matronics.com/contribution
> =========
>
>
>
> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-
List
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Here is the latest. People that fly for a living, airline, corporate etc, in
jets, will not require the yearly
check ride. For the others, it be a current examiner or if required they wil
l appoint FAA pilot certification people just
to do those rides.
In 2 weeks they are having an examiner meeting to determine the needs based o
n the new rules.
if I may suggest, forward me via Email, your concerns and I will get all of t
hem to that meeting. We should
address the need for more examiners due to cost.
As an aside, one owner needed his type ride, so I called an examiner in Seat
tle somewhere, he wanted
not only a days travel pay, I believe was &875, $875 for the ride, travel da
y back to Seattle, $875, a hotel because the flight got into SEA
to late to catch the ferry. Another travel day, $875, airline ticket.
That is what we don't want.
David Morse came to the rescue. He saved the guy a ton.
Bill
On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching? Appar
ently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the country divi
ded by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employment Act of 20
12".
>
> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting read
y for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting their sched
ule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>
> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
> From: colyergreg@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
> To: l29-list@matronics.com
>
> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>
>
> Greg
> 415-531-0970
> www.AceMakerAirshows.com
>
> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can g
ive dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement. I
will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>
> From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
> To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
> Subject: L29-List: Re:
>
> Bob,
> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No ans
wer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road, it ma
y take awhile. It will count as a BFR.
> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>
> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following se
as & fair winds.
> That should cover everyone.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clarify the new reg
ulation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to carry passenger
s in the jets. What constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any i
nstructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a type
rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type also. Can Bill or som
eone please clarify what exactly needs to take place. Also, does this ride a
lso act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
>
>
> Bob Schwartz
>
>
>
> =========
> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
> =========
> cs.com
> =========
> matronics.com/contribution
> =========
>
>
>
> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-
List
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
The issue regarding giving the type ride, as well as the annual re-currency
is a big issue.- For many of us, it would require a major expense to eit
her go the the examiner or bring him to us.- This is a nice new rule to u
se by the Feds to additionally reduce the amount of people left flying thes
e jets. =0A=0A=0AI appreciate your efforts Bill. However, where is CJAA, EA
A warbirds, RPA.- When last March the new certification rules became law,
there was hardly a peep from any of the organizations and those new rules
about flying over populated areas etc were major issues for all of us.-
-- Now this issue about annual proficiency check rides requiring examin
ers.--=0AIf the economy and high fuel don't finish us, the Feds will.
-- This proficiency deal needs to be worked out, so a CFI that is quali
fied in the particular jet in question can give the ride. We need some help
with more pull than we have individually.- Can someone get the organizat
ions involved. Looking for comments=0A=0ABob Schwartz=0AL-29, YAK 52=0A=0A
-=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Bill Geipel <czech
6@mesanetworks.net>=0ATo: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
=0ASent: Tuesday, January 3, 2012 11:34 AM=0ASubject: Re: L29-List: Re:=0A
=0A=0AI just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago -I talked wit
h the guy in charge of designee examiners. I explained that=0AIt is an undo
hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type ride. His response
, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.=0AYou have to pay for the ride"
I tried to explain the difference. You can imagine how that went. He said
we have-=0APlenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took pla
ce prior to the new rule.-=0AI called the Administrators office, no answe
r.=0AStill trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.=0A=0ABill=0A
=0A=0A=0AOn Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote
:=0A=0A=0A =0A>Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before lau
nching?- Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in
the country divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Em
ployment Act of 2012".=0A>=0A>I actually look forward to the little kick in
the behind that getting ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an ex
aminer and getting their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real p
ain in the rear.=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>________________________________=0A>Subject
: Re: L29-List: Re: =0A>From: colyergreg@aol.com=0A>Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 1
5:10:08 -0800=0A>To: l29-list@matronics.com=0A>=0A>=0A>Yea, as of now it's
an examiner....=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>Greg=0A>415-531-0970=0A>www.AceMakerAirshows
.com-=0A>=0A>On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com>
wrote:=0A>=0A>=0A>Thanks Bill and Greg.- It was never clear to me whethe
r any CFI that can give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new
FAA requirement.-- I will be looking forward to more info . thanks=0A>
>=0A>>-=0A>>From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>=0A>>To: "l29-list
@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com> =0A>>Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012
4:04 PM=0A>>Subject: L29-List: Re: =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Bob,=0A>>I have called a
nd sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No answer. Of course w
ith Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile.
It will count as a BFR.=0A>>In which case it will need to be a qualified CF
I.=0A>>I'll let you know when thy get back to me.=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Merry Chris
tmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following seas & fair wi
nds.=0A>>That should cover everyone.-=0A>>=0A>>Bill =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>
=0A>>=0A>>On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clari
fy the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to
carry passengers in the jets.--- What- constitutes an instructor th
at is acceptable.- Any instructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a ex
aminer that can give a type rating ?-- I understand that the ride must
be in type also. Can Bill or someone please clarify what exactly needs to t
ake place. Also, does this ride also act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for in
formation=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Bob Schwartz=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>
===========0A//www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List=0A
========== cs.com ========== matron
ics.com/contribution=0A========== =0A>>=nofollow targ
et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List =0A>>=0A>>=0A>3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=0A
tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-L
ist 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=0Abution%22" target
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
-=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Bill,
This where membership in organizations like AOPA, EAA, WOA, CJAA and Red
Star come in to play.
Contact them and let them handle the interaction with the FAA and
clarifying the rules.
That will help prevent several interpretations of the same reg, and will
keep everyone on track.
Also every member of those organizations add clout to their interaction
with the government.
Think of it this way, if you were the government employee, would you
rather get 10000+ calls from pilots.
Or two - three calls from organizations that represent the pilots.
Who is going to get the best results?
So, the best advice, don't kick the hornets nest.
Laterrrrrr
Avn-Tech
On 1/3/2012 9:34 AM, Bill Geipel wrote:
> I just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago I talked with
> the guy in charge of designee examiners. I explained that
> It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type
> ride. His response, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.
> You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference. You
> can imagine how that went. He said we have
> Plenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took place prior
> to the new rule.
> I called the Administrators office, no answer.
> Still trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com
> <mailto:jonboede@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching?
>> Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the
>> country divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170%
>> Employment Act of 2012".
>>
>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting
>> ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting
>> their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>> From: colyergreg@aol.com <mailto:colyergreg@aol.com>
>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>> To: l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>
>>
>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>
>>
>> Greg
>> 415-531-0970
>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com <http://www.AceMakerAirshows.com>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:delfin_driver@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI
>> that can give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new
>> FAA requirement. I will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>> *From:* Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net
>> <mailto:czech6@mesanetworks.net>>
>> *To:* "l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>"
>> <l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>>
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>> *Subject:* L29-List: Re:
>>
>> Bob,
>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for
>> clarification. No answer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being
>> drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile. It will count
>> as a BFR.
>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>
>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing,
>> following seas & fair winds.
>> That should cover everyone.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:l29delfin@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can
>> clarify the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency
>> with an instructor to carry passengers in the jets. What
>> constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any instructor
>> that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a
>> type rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type
>> also. Can Bill or someone please clarify what exactly needs
>> to take place. Also, does this ride also act as a bi-annual
>> ride? thanks for information
>>
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>>
>> *
>>
>> =========
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> =========
>> cs.com <http://cs.com/>
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ========== <http://matronics.com/contribution%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> 3D============================================
>> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> 3D============================================
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> 3D============================================
>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> 3D============================================
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
The examiner meeting is coming up. I would email the guy in charge in DC and
let him know your opinion
Regarding CFIs. To ask the current 4 L29 examiners to help wouldn't work for
obvious Reasons. $$$
I'm not saying that is their motivation, but at the present time they are ki
ngs.
I would vote for the EAA as representative. Less politics. RPA is more Yak/C
Js. I don't know how much
Pull CJAA has anymore. You members need to get in touch NOW. This is in effe
ct now. So we are already
behind the power curve. The concerned organizations should have done somethi
ng during the NPRM
(Notice of Proposed Rule Making). I have issue with check rides, just the fa
ct that there are only 4 guys that
can do the L29.
Raymond.Stinchcomb@faa.gov
Just mention your concerns with the expense in maintaining currency.
And to consider the CFI answer. He is thinking he will need to appoint a few
, 2-3, proficiency
pilot to conduct these rides. That is better. More competition means lower p
rices.
Each one of the current guys charge $800/day and up. Plus expenses.
When I was doing it, $500/day, and a place to sleep. I have free airline tic
kets.
I also taught you how to operate your airplane. Emergency gear ext reset, fl
ap system reset,
Fill struts, adjust brakes etc. All you get from them is the ride and a bill
for thousands of $$.
Not all are that way, however an extra 3000 to $5000 per year is another $30
0 to $500
per hour.
That is the message to convey.
Bill
On Jan 3, 2012, at 11:57 AM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The issue regarding giving the type ride, as well as the annual re-currenc
y is a big issue. For many of us, it would require a major expense to eithe
r go the the examiner or bring him to us. This is a nice new rule to use by
the Feds to additionally reduce the amount of people left flying these jets
.
>
> I appreciate your efforts Bill. However, where is CJAA, EAA warbirds, RPA.
When last March the new certification rules became law, there was hardly a
peep from any of the organizations and those new rules about flying over po
pulated areas etc were major issues for all of us. Now this issue about a
nnual proficiency check rides requiring examiners.
> If the economy and high fuel don't finish us, the Feds will. This profic
iency deal needs to be worked out, so a CFI that is qualified in the particu
lar jet in question can give the ride. We need some help with more pull than
we have individually. Can someone get the organizations involved. Looking f
or comments
>
> Bob Schwartz
> L-29, YAK 52
>
>
>
> From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
> To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2012 11:34 AM
> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>
> I just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago I talked with the gu
y in charge of designee examiners. I explained that
> It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type ride
. His response, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.
> You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference. You can i
magine how that went. He said we have
> Plenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took place prior to t
he new rule.
> I called the Administrators office, no answer.
> Still trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching? Appa
rently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the country div
ided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employment Act of 2
012".
>>
>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting rea
dy for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting their sche
dule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>>
>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>> From: colyergreg@aol.com
>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>> To: l29-list@matronics.com
>>
>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>
>>
>> Greg
>> 415-531-0970
>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can g
ive dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement. I
will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>>
>> From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
>> To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>> Subject: L29-List: Re:
>>
>> Bob,
>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No an
swer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road, it m
ay take awhile. It will count as a BFR.
>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>
>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following s
eas & fair winds.
>> That should cover everyone.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clarify the new re
gulation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to carry passenge
rs in the jets. What constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any i
nstructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a type
rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type also. Can Bill or som
eone please clarify what exactly needs to take place. Also, does this ride a
lso act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
>>
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>>
>>
>>
>> =========
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> =========
>> cs.com
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> =========
>>
>>
>>
>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29
-List
>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
They should of handled it when it was proposed. I understand, but where we'
re they? EAA in my book
Carries biggest stick.
Bill
On Jan 3, 2012, at 12:56 PM, John Fischer <fish@aviation-tech.com> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> This where membership in organizations like AOPA, EAA, WOA, CJAA and Red S
tar come in to play.
> Contact them and let them handle the interaction with the FAA and clarifyi
ng the rules.
> That will help prevent several interpretations of the same reg, and will k
eep everyone on track.
>
> Also every member of those organizations add clout to their interaction wi
th the government.
> Think of it this way, if you were the government employee, would you rathe
r get 10000+ calls from pilots.
> Or two - three calls from organizations that represent the pilots.
> Who is going to get the best results?
>
> So, the best advice, don't kick the hornets nest.
>
> Laterrrrrr
> Avn-Tech
>
>
> On 1/3/2012 9:34 AM, Bill Geipel wrote:
>>
>> I just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago I talked with the g
uy in charge of designee examiners. I explained that
>> It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type rid
e. His response, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.
>> You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference. You can i
magine how that went. He said we have
>> Plenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took place prior to
the new rule.
>> I called the Administrators office, no answer.
>> Still trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching? App
arently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the country di
vided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employment Act of 2
012".
>>>
>>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting re
ady for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting their sch
edule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>>> From: colyergreg@aol.com
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>>> To: l29-list@matronics.com
>>>
>>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>> 415-531-0970
>>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can
give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement.
I will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>>>
>>> From: Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>
>>> To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>>> Subject: L29-List: Re:
>>>
>>> Bob,
>>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for clarification. No a
nswer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being drunk on the side of the road, it m
ay take awhile. It will count as a BFR.
>>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>>
>>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following s
eas & fair winds.
>>> That should cover everyone.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can clarify the new r
egulation requiring an annual recurrency with an instructor to carry passeng
ers in the jets. What constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any
instructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a ty
pe rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type also. Can Bill or s
omeone please clarify what exactly needs to take place. Also, does this ride
also act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Schwartz
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =========
>>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>> =========
>>> cs.com
>>> =========
>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>> =========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D
>>> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L2
9-List
>>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D
>>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D
>>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> href="3D%22http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List%22">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> href="3D%22http://forums.matronics.com%22">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="3D%22http://www.matronics.com/contribution%22">http://www.matron
ics.com/contribution
>>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
My opinion, all of the organizaitons have been asleep on these issues.- A
lmost nothing was said about the major re-write of the certification issues
. That slid into law spring 2010 with little to no fanfare.- Now, the ann
ual check ride is here and I heard nothing about it either.-- We belong
to these organizations for help on these type of issues.- We have no pul
l individually in Washington.--- I am very disappointed with both of
these new rules and most people that it will interact with, dont even know
about either .---- I hope EAA is reading this-- just my opinion=0A
-=0Abob schwartz=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Bill Ge
ipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net>=0ATo: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@mat
ronics.com> =0ASent: Tuesday, January 3, 2012 3:20 PM=0ASubject: Re: L29-Li
st: Re:=0A=0A=0AThey -should of handled it when it was proposed. I unders
tand, but where we're they? EAA in my book-=0ACarries biggest stick.=0A
=0ABill =0A=0A=0A=0AOn Jan 3, 2012, at 12:56 PM, John Fischer <fish@aviatio
n-tech.com> wrote:=0A=0A=0ABill,=0A>=0A>This where membership in organizati
ons like AOPA, EAA, WOA, CJAA and Red Star come in to play.=0A>Contact them
and let them handle the interaction with the FAA and clarifying the rules.
- =0A>That will help prevent several interpretations of the same reg, and
will keep everyone on track.=0A>=0A>Also every member of those organizatio
ns add clout to their interaction with the government.=0A>Think of it this
way, if you were the government employee, would you rather get 10000+ calls
from pilots.=0A>Or two - three calls from organizations that represent the
pilots.=0A>Who is going to get the best results?=0A>=0A>So, the best advic
e, don't kick the hornets nest.=0A>=0A>Laterrrrrr=0A>Avn-Tech=0A>=0A>=0A>On
1/3/2012 9:34 AM, Bill Geipel wrote: =0A>I just made 3 more calls to DC. N
o luck.2 months ago -I talked with the guy in charge of designee examiner
s. I explained that=0A>>It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pa
y $5000 for a type ride. His response, "Well it's like getting a type in a
Lear.=0A>>You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference.
You can imagine how that went. He said we have-=0A>>Plenty of examiners t
o cover the need. ThIs of course took place prior to the new rule.-=0A>>I
called the Administrators office, no answer.=0A>>Still trying to carry our
concerns to them. Stay tuned.=0A>>=0A>>Bill =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>
On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:=0A>>=0A
>>=0A>>Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching?
- Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the co
untry divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170% Employmen
t Act of 2012".=0A>>>=0A>>>I actually look forward to the little kick in th
e behind that getting ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an exami
ner and getting their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain
in the rear.=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>________________________________=0A>>>
Subject: Re: L29-List: Re: =0A>>>From: colyergreg@aol.com=0A>>>Date: Mon, 2
Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800=0A>>>To: l29-list@matronics.com=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Y
ea, as of now it's an examiner....=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Greg=0A>>>415-531
-0970=0A>>>www.AceMakerAirshows.com-=0A>>>=0A>>>On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 P
M, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com> wrote:=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Thanks Bill and
Greg.- It was never clear to me whether any CFI that can give dual in th
e L-29 for example qualifies for this new FAA requirement.-- I will be
looking forward to more info . thanks=0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>From: Bill Geipel
<czech6@mesanetworks.net>=0A>>>>To: "l29-list@matronics.com" <l29-list@mat
ronics.com> =0A>>>>Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM=0A>>>>Subject: L29
-List: Re: =0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>Bob,=0A>>>>I have called and sent multi ema
il to Washington for clarification. No answer. Of course with Randy Babbitt
being drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile. It will count as
a BFR.=0A>>>>In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.=0A>>>>I'll l
et you know when thy get back to me.=0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>Merry Christmas, h
appy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing, following seas & fair winds.=0A
>>>>That should cover everyone.-=0A>>>>=0A>>>>Bill =0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>
=0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.co
m> wrote:=0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>>With the start of the new year I am hoping so
meone can clarify the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency with an
instructor to carry passengers in the jets.--- What- constitutes a
n instructor that is acceptable.- Any instructor that can give dual in th
e L-29, or a examiner that can give a type rating ?-- I understand that
the ride must be in type also. Can Bill or someone please clarify what exa
ctly needs to take place. Also, does this ride also act as a bi-annual ride
? thanks for information=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>Bob
Schwartz=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>=0A>>>>>==========//www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?L29-List========== cs.com =
========= matronics.com/contribution======
==== =0A>>>>=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Na
vigator?L29-List =0A>>>>=0A>>>>=0A>>>3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dtor?L29-List%22" target="_blan
k">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D target="_blank">htt
p://forums.matronics.com 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dbution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matro
nics.com/contribution 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =0A>>href="3D%22http://www.matronics.com/Naviga
tor?L29-List%22">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List href="3D%22h
ttp://forums.matronics.com%22">http://forums.matronics.com href="3D%22htt
p://www.matronics.com/contribution%22">http://www.matronics.com/contributio
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Does historical data indicate that this new rule is even needed???
How does the FAA propose we PAY for this nonsense?
When are they going to BUTT OUT when safety is not concerned?
This looks like a political move to deny planes that *look* like
military birds.
Where was the public comment time? Where was the Congressional input?
David Merchant
Bill Geipel wrote:
> Here is the latest. People that fly for a living, airline, corporate
> etc, in jets, will not require the yearly
> check ride. For the others, it be a current examiner or if required
> they will appoint FAA pilot certification people just
> to do those rides.
> In 2 weeks they are having an examiner meeting to determine the needs
> based on the new rules.
> if I may suggest, forward me via Email, your concerns and I will get
> all of them to that meeting. We should
> address the need for more examiners due to cost.
> As an aside, one owner needed his type ride, so I called an examiner
> in Seattle somewhere, he wanted
> not only a days travel pay, I believe was &875, $875 for the ride,
> travel day back to Seattle, $875, a hotel because the flight got into SEA
> to late to catch the ferry. Another travel day, $875, airline ticket.
> That is what we don't want.
> David Morse came to the rescue. He saved the guy a ton.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com
> <mailto:jonboede@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching?
>> Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the
>> country divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170%
>> Employment Act of 2012".
>>
>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting
>> ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting
>> their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>> From: colyergreg@aol.com <mailto:colyergreg@aol.com>
>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>> To: l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>
>>
>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>
>>
>> Greg
>> 415-531-0970
>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com <http://www.AceMakerAirshows.com>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:delfin_driver@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI
>> that can give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new
>> FAA requirement. I will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>> *From:* Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net
>> <mailto:czech6@mesanetworks.net>>
>> *To:* "l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>"
>> <l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>>
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>> *Subject:* L29-List: Re:
>>
>> Bob,
>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for
>> clarification. No answer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being
>> drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile. It will count
>> as a BFR.
>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>
>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing,
>> following seas & fair winds.
>> That should cover everyone.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:l29delfin@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can
>> clarify the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency
>> with an instructor to carry passengers in the jets. What
>> constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any instructor
>> that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a
>> type rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type
>> also. Can Bill or someone please clarify what exactly needs
>> to take place. Also, does this ride also act as a bi-annual
>> ride? thanks for information
>>
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>>
>> *
>>
>> =========
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> =========
>> cs.com <http://cs.com/>
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ========== <http://matronics.com/contribution%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> 3D============================================
>> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> 3D============================================
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> 3D============================================
>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> 3D============================================
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>> ==================================
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> ==================================
>> cs.com
>> ==================================
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ==================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
--
Tell the truth. Be honest. Be responsible to and for yourself.
I liked America when it was free and it's people were responsible and had morals.
Every gram of cocaine you buy from elsewhere contributes to an innocent being murdered
in Central and South America. Grow your own or Stop taking it.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Just look where "not kicking the hornets nest" has gotten us so far.
David
John Fischer wrote:
> Bill,
>
> This where membership in organizations like AOPA, EAA, WOA, CJAA and
> Red Star come in to play.
> Contact them and let them handle the interaction with the FAA and
> clarifying the rules.
> That will help prevent several interpretations of the same reg, and
> will keep everyone on track.
>
> Also every member of those organizations add clout to their
> interaction with the government.
> Think of it this way, if you were the government employee, would you
> rather get 10000+ calls from pilots.
> Or two - three calls from organizations that represent the pilots.
> Who is going to get the best results?
>
> So, the best advice, don't kick the hornets nest.
>
> Laterrrrrr
> Avn-Tech
>
>
> On 1/3/2012 9:34 AM, Bill Geipel wrote:
>> I just made 3 more calls to DC. No luck.2 months ago I talked with
>> the guy in charge of designee examiners. I explained that
>> It is an undo hardship on the pilots/students to pay $5000 for a type
>> ride. His response, "Well it's like getting a type in a Lear.
>> You have to pay for the ride" I tried to explain the difference. You
>> can imagine how that went. He said we have
>> Plenty of examiners to cover the need. ThIs of course took place
>> prior to the new rule.
>> I called the Administrators office, no answer.
>> Still trying to carry our concerns to them. Stay tuned.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com
>> <mailto:jonboede@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching?
>>> Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the
>>> country divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170%
>>> Employment Act of 2012".
>>>
>>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that
>>> getting ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and
>>> getting their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain
>>> in the rear.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>>> From: colyergreg@aol.com <mailto:colyergreg@aol.com>
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>>> To: l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>
>>>
>>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>> 415-531-0970
>>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com <http://www.AceMakerAirshows.com>
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com
>>> <mailto:delfin_driver@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI
>>> that can give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this
>>> new FAA requirement. I will be looking forward to more info .
>>> thanks
>>> *From:* Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net
>>> <mailto:czech6@mesanetworks.net>>
>>> *To:* "l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>"
>>> <l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>>> *Subject:* L29-List: Re:
>>>
>>> Bob,
>>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for
>>> clarification. No answer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being
>>> drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile. It will count
>>> as a BFR.
>>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>>
>>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing,
>>> following seas & fair winds.
>>> That should cover everyone.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com
>>> <mailto:l29delfin@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can
>>> clarify the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency
>>> with an instructor to carry passengers in the jets. What
>>> constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any
>>> instructor that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner
>>> that can give a type rating ? I understand that the ride
>>> must be in type also. Can Bill or someone please clarify
>>> what exactly needs to take place. Also, does this ride also
>>> act as a bi-annual ride? thanks for information
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Schwartz
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> =========
>>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>> =========
>>> cs.com <http://cs.com/>
>>> =========
>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>> ========== <http://matronics.com/contribution%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> 3D============================================
>>> tor?L29-List%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>> 3D============================================
>>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> 3D============================================
>>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> 3D============================================
>>>
>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>> *
>>
>> href="3D%22http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List%22">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> href="3D%22http://forums.matronics.com%22">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="3D%22http://www.matronics.com/contribution%22">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Tell the truth. Be honest. Be responsible to and for yourself.
I liked America when it was free and it's people were responsible and had morals.
Every gram of cocaine you buy from elsewhere contributes to an innocent being murdered
in Central and South America. Grow your own or Stop taking it.
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
This rule was actually intended for the VLJ's ( i.e. single pilot biz jets)
that the rich guys are flying around. We, the warbirds, just got lumped in
with it.... The EAA, CJAA and I believe the AOPA are trying to get the
warbirds removed from it... but voice your thoughts!!
In a message dated 1/3/2012 5:12:05 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
ainut@knology.net writes:
--> L29-List message posted by: David <ainut@knology.net>
Does historical data indicate that this new rule is even needed???
How does the FAA propose we PAY for this nonsense?
When are they going to BUTT OUT when safety is not concerned?
This looks like a political move to deny planes that *look* like
military birds.
Where was the public comment time? Where was the Congressional input?
David Merchant
Bill Geipel wrote:
> Here is the latest. People that fly for a living, airline, corporate
> etc, in jets, will not require the yearly
> check ride. For the others, it be a current examiner or if required
> they will appoint FAA pilot certification people just
> to do those rides.
> In 2 weeks they are having an examiner meeting to determine the needs
> based on the new rules.
> if I may suggest, forward me via Email, your concerns and I will get
> all of them to that meeting. We should
> address the need for more examiners due to cost.
> As an aside, one owner needed his type ride, so I called an examiner
> in Seattle somewhere, he wanted
> not only a days travel pay, I believe was &875, $875 for the ride,
> travel day back to Seattle, $875, a hotel because the flight got into SEA
> to late to catch the ferry. Another travel day, $875, airline ticket.
> That is what we don't want.
> David Morse came to the rescue. He saved the guy a ton.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com
> <mailto:jonboede@hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Did the FAA do the weight and balance on this one before launching?
>> Apparently not... given just the number of L-29 and L-39 guys in the
>> country divided by the number of examiners makes this the "EAE 170%
>> Employment Act of 2012".
>>
>> I actually look forward to the little kick in the behind that getting
>> ready for a checkride gives me, but locating an examiner and getting
>> their schedule to mesh with mine is going to be a real pain in the rear.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Subject: Re: L29-List: Re:
>> From: colyergreg@aol.com <mailto:colyergreg@aol.com>
>> Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:10:08 -0800
>> To: l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>
>>
>> Yea, as of now it's an examiner....
>>
>>
>> Greg
>> 415-531-0970
>> www.AceMakerAirshows.com <http://www.AceMakerAirshows.com>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:13 PM, delfin <delfin_driver@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:delfin_driver@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Bill and Greg. It was never clear to me whether any CFI
>> that can give dual in the L-29 for example qualifies for this new
>> FAA requirement. I will be looking forward to more info . thanks
>> *From:* Bill Geipel <czech6@mesanetworks.net
>> <mailto:czech6@mesanetworks.net>>
>> *To:* "l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>"
>> <l29-list@matronics.com <mailto:l29-list@matronics.com>>
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 2, 2012 4:04 PM
>> *Subject:* L29-List: Re:
>>
>> Bob,
>> I have called and sent multi email to Washington for
>> clarification. No answer. Of course with Randy Babbitt being
>> drunk on the side of the road, it may take awhile. It will count
>> as a BFR.
>> In which case it will need to be a qualified CFI.
>> I'll let you know when thy get back to me.
>>
>> Merry Christmas, happy new year, blue sky's , smooth sailing,
>> following seas & fair winds.
>> That should cover everyone.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:46 PM, delfin <l29delfin@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:l29delfin@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>
>> With the start of the new year I am hoping someone can
>> clarify the new regulation requiring an annual recurrency
>> with an instructor to carry passengers in the jets. What
>> constitutes an instructor that is acceptable. Any instructor
>> that can give dual in the L-29, or a examiner that can give a
>> type rating ? I understand that the ride must be in type
>> also. Can Bill or someone please clarify what exactly needs
>> to take place. Also, does this ride also act as a bi-annual
>> ride? thanks for information
>>
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>>
>> *
>>
>> =========
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> =========
>> cs.com <http://cs.com/>
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
<http://matronics.com/contribution%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d%3d>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> =nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
3D============================================
>> tor?L29-List%22"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>>
3D============================================
>> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
3D============================================
>> bution%22" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
3D============================================
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>> ==================================
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?L29-List
>> ==================================
>> cs.com
>> ==================================
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ==================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
--
Tell the truth. Be honest. Be responsible to and for yourself.
I liked America when it was free and it's people were responsible and had
morals.
Every gram of cocaine you buy from elsewhere contributes to an innocent
being murdered in Central and South America. Grow your own or Stop taking
it.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|