AOPA Pilot Magazine - October 2013 - 12

LETTERS

FROM OUR AUGUST 2013 ISSUE

Waypoints: Diversity
Editor in Chief Thomas B. Haines received many comments on his column, which suggested
that “aviation is our common ground, but not much else.”
What does private aviation
mean to you? Private aviation
to me means freedom. It means
the ability to go where I want to,
when I want to, and do it without asking permission from
a governing state. Aviation is
part of my American dream—
the pursuit of my happiness. I
dreamt of becoming a pilot as
a child so that I might someday have the ability to take part
in this wonderful experience.
I’m with the government and
I’m here to help is a statement
that too many of us are hearing too frequently. The reason
that I am an AOPA member is
that I expect this organization
to act as aviation advocate. The
first priority of this organization
should be to protect our liberty
and right to use our airspace in
a safe manner, not to favor one
political party over another.
I am a state trooper for a
state with a very large population. Every day I have the duty
to uphold our United States’
and state’s constitution. I deal
often with the laws of search
and seizure and I intimately
understand that infringement
upon individual rights has
become somewhat of a fine
line, which in itself is a travesty.
The thought of our overgrown,
overspending government
continuously overstepping its
power is an abomination of
our individual freedoms. The
thought of our government
performing searches without probable cause is truly
frightening and this practice is
eroding the very principles that
our founding fathers fought so
12 | AOPA PILOT October 2013

Waypoints

Diversity

By Thomas B. haines
Editor in Chief

Aviation is our common ground, but not much else
We are a diverse loT, we AOPA members. From

EdITOr In ChIEf

Tom Haines has
been reporting on
the general aviation
industry for nearly
30 years.

student pilots to astronauts, our skills, interests, and
political leanings are all over the map. Two recent trends
involving the federal government highlight how philosophically diverse we are. Unable to make the hard
decisions necessary to reduce an out-of-control federal
budget deficit, Congress and the White House crafted,
approved, and ultimately allowed to go live sequestration legislation that forced small to sometimes dramatic
cuts to the budgets of various agencies.
As we have written about the effect on the FAA, some
members want to argue about whose fault it is. Some
accuse AOPA of favoring the Obama Administration,
believing that the White House wrote and implemented
this legislation all by itself. Others say, no, it started in
Congress and the blame should go there. They accuse
AOPA of “siding” with Congress. Truth is, as planned
by the founding fathers, it took both branches to get this
legislation written and implemented.
Among the FAA’s responses to sequestration were to
cut the contract air traffic control tower program, one
of the biggest federal outsourcing success stories ever.
Study after study shows that contract towers operate
more efficiently than federally staffed towers with no
degradation in safety. But because it was a contract, it
was easy for the FAA to lop off that expense. AOPA and
other aviation associations said, “Hey, wait a minute,
those are almost all general aviation airports. Why are
you focusing the cuts on GA?” The associations urged
the FAA to develop some metrics around which towers could be closed without impacting safety; after all,
there is a process for determining when an airport gets a
tower. While times change and some towers may no longer be necessary, others in fact do contribute to safety.
Some AOPA members believed that all of the towers should be closed. They cheered the FAA’s plan and
were disappointed at what they believed to be AOPA’s
position in favor of keeping them all open. AOPA’s position always reflected the probability that some towers
could be safely closed; we just didn’t agree with the
FAA’s approach of using a chain saw where a scalpel
was needed. Many other members welcomed AOPA’s
position, especially those who operate at busy airports
with contract towers. Meanwhile, the towers are now
funded through the end of the fiscal year.
Recently, some pilots have been met by brownshirted, armed federal agents upon landing. The agents

frequently detain the pilots, sometimes for hours, while
they go over documents and search the airplanes—
sometimes calling in local law enforcement to assist.
They never seem to state the reason for the stop, or
their authority for detaining pilots. AOPA Government
Affairs and Pilot Information Center staffs began to
compile the reports from members. We reported on
the incidents on AOPA Online and AOPA Live This
Week, causing a sensation among other media. After
we broke the story, publications from AvWeb to The
Atlantic reported on the plight of pilots harassed by federal agents. Most frustrating, the agents sometimes are
working with incorrect information about what documents pilots are required to carry in their airplanes. Two
years ago, AOPA staff pointed out errors in the guidelines used by Customs and Border Protection agents,
yet the agency corrected only some of the errors—and
the original guidelines are still in circulation. To assist
pilots in a stop, we created a guide in a kneeboard format. See the guide following page 96.
After not receiving a response for months about our
Freedom of Information Act requests for the agencies’
authority for the stops, AOPA sent a strongly worded
letter to the acting CBP commissioner demanding an
answer and threatening to elevate the situation to a
Congressional investigation.
The response from our diverse membership is
equally interesting. Regarding the Congressional investigation, some are asking, “What are you waiting for?”
Regarding the stops, one member wrote: “Conditioning
for the police state; no one is left out. You don’t have to
look far for the answers.”
Others welcome the additional security they perceive from the stops. “I have to ask one question. If you
are a law-abiding pilot and are stopped by border patrol
or homeland security, what really is the problem?” And
another: “Stop being such pansies. If law enforcement
is conducting a search of one’s aircraft, they must have
a legal reason. If you have nothing to hide, who cares?”
Whatever your point of view, somewhere there is
another AOPA member with an equally strident opposite position on the subject.
High wing versus low wing, anyone?
AOPA
EmAIL thomas.haines@aopa.org

social

Follow on twitter.com/tomhaines29

“With even a
relatively small proportion of members
who may not think
rationally about
issues, AOPA nevertheless has to act
rationally on issues
without alienating those irrational
members. It’s a great
challenge, and for
the most part AOPA
has been successful.”
Peter Duniho
AOPA 1187247
Kirkland, Washington

are accepting this is even more
heartbreaking. Look around.
This government is not getting
smaller. This government is
getting more oppressive by the
minute. We must not stand by
and wait until our freedom has
been taken. I assure you that
after it is gone, it will be much
more difficult if not impossible
to regain. This is not an issue of
high wing versus low wing. This
is an issue that has much deeper
and consequential meaning. Our
members must act as one to protect our rights and liberty.
Name Withheld
Upon Request

Comparing our diverse opinion of high versus low wing to
opinions about the government
stopping and searching pilots
is irresponsible and devoid
of any understanding of the
present and history. Whoever
says Stop being such pansies, if
you have nothing to hide, who
cares? and If you are a lawabiding pilot, what really is the
problem?—while I admire their
childlike trust in the power of
government, I question their
ability to understand what
has happened to every nation,
throughout all human history—with no exception—that
has the unquestionable right
to stop and search its citizens. Police states always start
out in the name of safety and
end very badly.
Paul Philip Pent II
AOPA 5879282

hard to protect. These simple
St. Augustine, Florida
principles can, and do, translate
directly into our cherished free- Benjamin Franklin famously
doms of the sky. The fact that stated that anyone willing to
some of our brothers in aviation surrender freedom for security

deserves neither. The nothingto-hide argument is a straw
man, in that unchecked power
always turns to its own ends.
Freedom comes with risks and
is its own end. If you do not
accept these ideas, please consider another country in which
to live—by the way, they have
all destroyed aviation.
Jerry Thompson
AOPA 3845758
Minneapolis, Minnesota

Diesel dawn

I loved the August issue of
AOPA Pilot. Aerodiesels are
of great interest to me (“Will
We All Be Flying Diesels?”). I
believe that as time goes on,
diesel aircraft will become
more mainstream. In 2004, I
ordered a Van’s RV9 kit, with
the idea of installing a Wilksch
WAM 120 turbodiesel engine.
Wilksch Airmotive was wonderful to work with. I first
flew the airplane in November
2008. I have had great success
with the RV9/WAM120 combination. As of today, I have
flown it 461 hours with no
problems at all.
As the article about the
Diamond DA42VI indicates (“Not Your Father’s
Airplane”), flying the diesel
is different, and, in my opinion, much easier. No need to
worry about priming, flooding, hot starts, lean of peak,
rich of peak, shock cooling, or
backfiring. Just get in, start it
up, and fly. The turbocharger
is a nice bonus at higher altitude airports.
Kurt Goodfellow
AOPA 17755005
Boulder City, Nevada

AOPA Pilot Magazine - October 2013

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - October 2013