----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----


Most eloquent, Dr. RB! Thanks for your thoughts. I'd
like to see this in an editorial in one of the flying
magazines.

Spook


--- "Dr. R. B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> "The answer is simple....Where do you draw the line
> ??? There has to be a
> number,.."
> *************
> I guess I'm just a country boy.  When I hear a
> statement like the one above, 
> my first response is to ask.....WHY?
> 
> There has to be a number?   If you accept that
> statement, then by the rules 
> of logic you MUST ALSO accept the following
> statement:
> 
> A committee sitting in a room knows
> more about a pilot's physical ability to fly an
> airplane than the doctor 
> examining him.  Or her.
> 
> My friends, from my heart, when we start believing
> that, no matter how many 
> planes are in the air, aviation is dead.  And no
> matter how many of us
> are still walking around, we are dead also.
> 
> But sure, there have to be SOME numbers.
> There has to be a number for vision: 20/40,
> 20/200,...and so on.
> There has to be a number for heartbeats: 120/70,
> 95/65...and so on.
> 
> BUT THERE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A NUMBER FOR AGE.
> 
> We Baby Boomers comprise a 40 million person spike
> in American generational 
> demographics.  America will never produce
> another generation as large as ours.  Many of us are
> now entering retirement 
> age and ALL OF US ARE OVER 40!  Now think about that
> for a moment, and think 
> about the POWER we have.
> 
> The FAA must confront the question of qualifying
> ageing pilots for two 
> reasons:
> 
> First, the numbers I just quoted.  Many of us now
> have the time, the money, 
> and the what-the-hell attitude required to blow
> thousands on this wonderful 
> passtime and we're starting to flood into the
> training stream.
> 
> Second, the emergence of the Sport Pilot sub-genre
> of aviation will attract 
> us by droves.  The FAA MUST address this, and we
> MUST make sure they do it 
> in an inclusionary way, not in the exclusionary way
> that their regulations 
> are now written.
> 
> Today, the vision underpinning FAA's entire
> regulatory mechanism is this:
> 
> "The Reg Is Made; We Know Best; God Help You If You
> Violate."
> 
> We MUST change that attitude to this:
> 
> "These Regs Are Made To Keep You Safe And To
> Encourage You To Fly."
> 
> We can do this.
> 
> Dr. R. Beeman
> 



                
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 
==========================================================================
====
To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers/


<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to