Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: Re: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll

Expand Messages
  • Jay D
    Do you think ANY of your rants and raves will have any outcome on the final rule? Hmmmm..... Jay D
    Message 1 of 7 , May 1, 2004
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Do you think ANY of your rants and raves will have any outcome on the
      final rule?

      Hmmmm.....

      Jay D



      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Steven J. Cooper [mailto:spdrflyr@...]
      > Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:20 AM
      > To: FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: UL: Re: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll
      >
      > Can you guarantee this list that the final rulle is dramatically
      > different from the NPRM? Yes...you'll do a lot of speculating...but
      > can you guarantee it? I believe that it is much more likely that the
      > rule will be very close to the NPRM. Now, I'll make this point...I do
      > not care about any numbers/dollars/statistics/minusha. I just don't
      > care weather or not FAAs numbers were right or wrong. I want the
      > rule. If FAA changed some statistical numbers in the rule to satisfy
      > OMB then I could care less. Got it? It don't matter to me one little
      > bit. I do care about the opportunities presented by the basic outline
      > of what Sport Pilot will do:
      >
      > Will Phelp's email:
      >
      > Do you want to fly without a doctor's approval?
      >
      > Do you want your plane to weigh between 254 pounds and XXX? (don't
      > know the limit)
      >
      > Do you want to be able to carry one passenger?
      >
      > Do you want to be able to carry more than 5 gallons of fuel?
      >
      > Do you want to be able to fly at XXX Mph?
      >
      > If not, do you object to those that do?
      >
      > (thanks Will)
      >
      > Steve
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, Robert Metzler <sleepy6@a...> wrote:
      > > Steve it appears that you think the final version will be very
      > > close to the NPRM and that you didn't find much wrong with the
      > > NPRM.
      > >
      > > You also seem to think that Jim is anti sport simply because he
      > > refuses to support SP until he knows what the final version says.
      > >
      > > Is this logical or even rational?
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Steve Cooper wrote:
      > > >
      > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > From: "Jim C" <jimc@d...>
      > > > To: <FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:53 AM
      > > > Subject: UL: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll
      > > >
      > > > > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@e...>
      > wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > > "... You guys don't understand that you're wayyyyy on the
      > wrong
      > > > > side of this thing. People want Sport Pilot..."
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Steve
      > > > >
      > > > > Hmmmm, maybe - Don't know about the poll thingy, but I would
      > say the
      > > > > same thing on the anti-sprot poll as I did on the pro-sprot
      > poll -
      > > > > What does the rule really say "now" and what changes were made,
      > > > > otherwise how can I make an informed decision. I still haven't
      > got
      > > > > an answer to that one, and still don't know what all those
      > people put
      > > > > their blind signatures to.
      > > >
      > > > Oh, I thought you read the NPRM. I guess you didn't...or are you
      > parroting
      > > > what others have said about numbers being different or something.
      > I don't
      > > > care if they are different. I've read the NPRM and liked what I
      > saw...for
      > > > the most part.
      > > > >
      > > > > As to what is not understood about all the people that really
      > want
      > > > > SP, I say most in favor of SP don't really care one way or the
      > other
      > > > > about it - What they really want is the "DL Med".
      > > >
      > > > that maybe true...but so what? For Sport Pilot is FOR SPORT PILOT.
      > > >
      > > > If you have been
      > > > > paying attention to EAA over the years, it's as obvious as can
      > be.
      > > > > It's the whole spearhead of their part in the movement and
      > several
      > > > > other failed attempts. Take that out, and its a dead issue.
      > > >
      > > > The EAA must bedoing something right...their membership rolls
      > proves that.
      > > > What .,..some mysterious agenda on EAAs part? I don't give a damn
      > if there
      > > > is. As far as I'm concerned...that's a lot of minusha.
      > > >
      > > > steve
      > > > >
      > > > > JMHO of course - Jim C
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Jim C
      ... the ... Nope - it s just fodder to think about. jim C
      Message 2 of 7 , May 1, 2004
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, "Jay D" <jdewberry@i...> wrote:
        > Do you think ANY of your rants and raves will have any outcome on
        the
        > final rule?
        >
        > Hmmmm.....
        >
        > Jay D

        Nope - it's just fodder to think about.

        jim C
      • Steve Cooper
        And neither will yours Robert. ;) Steve ... From: Robert Metzler To: Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:02 PM
        Message 3 of 7 , May 1, 2004
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          And neither will yours Robert. ;)

          Steve
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Robert Metzler" <sleepy6@...>
          To: <FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:02 PM
          Subject: Re: UL: Re: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll


          > Steven J. Cooper wrote:
          > >
          > > Can you guarantee this list that the final rulle is dramatically
          > > different from the NPRM? Yes...you'll do a lot of speculating...but
          > > can you guarantee it?
          >
          > Can you guarantee this list that the final rule will still have
          > the DL medical? All the same arguments were made for the DL
          > medical in rec pilot and it was removed in the final version:)
          >
          >
          > > I believe that it is much more likely that the
          > > rule will be very close to the NPRM. Now, I'll make this point...I do
          > > not care about any numbers/dollars/statistics/minusha. I just don't
          > > care weather or not FAAs numbers were right or wrong. I want the
          > > rule. If FAA changed some statistical numbers in the rule to satisfy
          > > OMB then I could care less. Got it? It don't matter to me one little
          > > bit. I do care about the opportunities presented by the basic outline
          > > of what Sport Pilot will do:
          >
          > Yep it's pretty obvious that you don't care whats in the final
          > rule right now. When/if it becomes a regulation you probably
          > will care:)
          >
          > BTW All your wanting and whining will not affect one single word
          > in the final version. Why not simply wait and see what the final
          > version says?
          >
          >
          >
          > > Will Phelp's email:
          > >
          > > Do you want to fly without a doctor's approval?
          > >
          > > Do you want your plane to weigh between 254 pounds and XXX? (don't
          > > know the limit)
          > >
          > > Do you want to be able to carry one passenger?
          > >
          > > Do you want to be able to carry more than 5 gallons of fuel?
          > >
          > > Do you want to be able to fly at XXX Mph?
          > >
          > > If not, do you object to those that do?
          > >
          > > (thanks Will)
          > >
          > > Steve
          > >
          > > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, Robert Metzler <sleepy6@a...> wrote:
          > > > Steve it appears that you think the final version will be very
          > > > close to the NPRM and that you didn't find much wrong with the
          > > > NPRM.
          > > >
          > > > You also seem to think that Jim is anti sport simply because he
          > > > refuses to support SP until he knows what the final version says.
          > > >
          > > > Is this logical or even rational?
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Steve Cooper wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > > > From: "Jim C" <jimc@d...>
          > > > > To: <FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com>
          > > > > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:53 AM
          > > > > Subject: UL: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll
          > > > >
          > > > > > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@e...>
          > > wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > > "... You guys don't understand that you're wayyyyy on the
          > > wrong
          > > > > > side of this thing. People want Sport Pilot..."
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > Steve
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Hmmmm, maybe - Don't know about the poll thingy, but I would
          > > say the
          > > > > > same thing on the anti-sprot poll as I did on the pro-sprot
          > > poll -
          > > > > > What does the rule really say "now" and what changes were made,
          > > > > > otherwise how can I make an informed decision. I still haven't
          > > got
          > > > > > an answer to that one, and still don't know what all those
          > > people put
          > > > > > their blind signatures to.
          > > > >
          > > > > Oh, I thought you read the NPRM. I guess you didn't...or are you
          > > parroting
          > > > > what others have said about numbers being different or something.
          > > I don't
          > > > > care if they are different. I've read the NPRM and liked what I
          > > saw...for
          > > > > the most part.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > As to what is not understood about all the people that really
          > > want
          > > > > > SP, I say most in favor of SP don't really care one way or the
          > > other
          > > > > > about it - What they really want is the "DL Med".
          > > > >
          > > > > that maybe true...but so what? For Sport Pilot is FOR SPORT PILOT.
          > > > >
          > > > > If you have been
          > > > > > paying attention to EAA over the years, it's as obvious as can
          > > be.
          > > > > > It's the whole spearhead of their part in the movement and
          > > several
          > > > > > other failed attempts. Take that out, and its a dead issue.
          > > > >
          > > > > The EAA must bedoing something right...their membership rolls
          > > proves that.
          > > > > What .,..some mysterious agenda on EAAs part? I don't give a damn
          > > if there
          > > > > is. As far as I'm concerned...that's a lot of minusha.
          > > > >
          > > > > steve
          > > > > >
          > > > > > JMHO of course - Jim C
          > >
          > >
          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Robert Metzler
          ... Can you guarantee this list that the final rule will still have the DL medical? All the same arguments were made for the DL medical in rec pilot and it
          Message 4 of 7 , May 1, 2004
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Steven J. Cooper wrote:
            >
            > Can you guarantee this list that the final rulle is dramatically
            > different from the NPRM? Yes...you'll do a lot of speculating...but
            > can you guarantee it?

            Can you guarantee this list that the final rule will still have
            the DL medical? All the same arguments were made for the DL
            medical in rec pilot and it was removed in the final version:)


            > I believe that it is much more likely that the
            > rule will be very close to the NPRM. Now, I'll make this point...I do
            > not care about any numbers/dollars/statistics/minusha. I just don't
            > care weather or not FAAs numbers were right or wrong. I want the
            > rule. If FAA changed some statistical numbers in the rule to satisfy
            > OMB then I could care less. Got it? It don't matter to me one little
            > bit. I do care about the opportunities presented by the basic outline
            > of what Sport Pilot will do:

            Yep it's pretty obvious that you don't care whats in the final
            rule right now. When/if it becomes a regulation you probably
            will care:)

            BTW All your wanting and whining will not affect one single word
            in the final version. Why not simply wait and see what the final
            version says?



            > Will Phelp's email:
            >
            > Do you want to fly without a doctor's approval?
            >
            > Do you want your plane to weigh between 254 pounds and XXX? (don't
            > know the limit)
            >
            > Do you want to be able to carry one passenger?
            >
            > Do you want to be able to carry more than 5 gallons of fuel?
            >
            > Do you want to be able to fly at XXX Mph?
            >
            > If not, do you object to those that do?
            >
            > (thanks Will)
            >
            > Steve
            >
            > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, Robert Metzler <sleepy6@a...> wrote:
            > > Steve it appears that you think the final version will be very
            > > close to the NPRM and that you didn't find much wrong with the
            > > NPRM.
            > >
            > > You also seem to think that Jim is anti sport simply because he
            > > refuses to support SP until he knows what the final version says.
            > >
            > > Is this logical or even rational?
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Steve Cooper wrote:
            > > >
            > > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > > From: "Jim C" <jimc@d...>
            > > > To: <FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com>
            > > > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:53 AM
            > > > Subject: UL: Re: Anti-Sport Pilot Poll
            > > >
            > > > > --- In FLY-UL@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Cooper" <spdrflyr@e...>
            > wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > > "... You guys don't understand that you're wayyyyy on the
            > wrong
            > > > > side of this thing. People want Sport Pilot..."
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Steve
            > > > >
            > > > > Hmmmm, maybe - Don't know about the poll thingy, but I would
            > say the
            > > > > same thing on the anti-sprot poll as I did on the pro-sprot
            > poll -
            > > > > What does the rule really say "now" and what changes were made,
            > > > > otherwise how can I make an informed decision. I still haven't
            > got
            > > > > an answer to that one, and still don't know what all those
            > people put
            > > > > their blind signatures to.
            > > >
            > > > Oh, I thought you read the NPRM. I guess you didn't...or are you
            > parroting
            > > > what others have said about numbers being different or something.
            > I don't
            > > > care if they are different. I've read the NPRM and liked what I
            > saw...for
            > > > the most part.
            > > > >
            > > > > As to what is not understood about all the people that really
            > want
            > > > > SP, I say most in favor of SP don't really care one way or the
            > other
            > > > > about it - What they really want is the "DL Med".
            > > >
            > > > that maybe true...but so what? For Sport Pilot is FOR SPORT PILOT.
            > > >
            > > > If you have been
            > > > > paying attention to EAA over the years, it's as obvious as can
            > be.
            > > > > It's the whole spearhead of their part in the movement and
            > several
            > > > > other failed attempts. Take that out, and its a dead issue.
            > > >
            > > > The EAA must bedoing something right...their membership rolls
            > proves that.
            > > > What .,..some mysterious agenda on EAAs part? I don't give a damn
            > if there
            > > > is. As far as I'm concerned...that's a lot of minusha.
            > > >
            > > > steve
            > > > >
            > > > > JMHO of course - Jim C
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.