If we think about it that almost makes sense. For as long as I can remember the relationship between the FAA and NTSB has been at best somewhat competitive and at worst somewhat adversarial.
The NTSB makes recommendations to the FAA for safety improvements that often go unfulfilled, especially when such improvements would end up costing air carriers money. If we look at the history of the FAA we might find considerable preference has been shown to the side of aviation that generates the most revenue, or employs the most lobbyists.
The FAA may well view NTSB rules as not their problem, believing that if the NTSB isn’t vocal about their rules, why should the FAA deal with it? Not their job or “in their lane”.
What sucks is that obscure regulations can trap otherwise law abiding people and place them in positions that can devastate a career or business. Then again, governments are quite good at creating such traps, for reasons we will probably never understand. If we look hard at the Part 107 rules we mind find more than a few “gotcha’s” in those.
The NTSB makes recommendations to the FAA for safety improvements that often go unfulfilled, especially when such improvements would end up costing air carriers money. If we look at the history of the FAA we might find considerable preference has been shown to the side of aviation that generates the most revenue, or employs the most lobbyists.
The FAA may well view NTSB rules as not their problem, believing that if the NTSB isn’t vocal about their rules, why should the FAA deal with it? Not their job or “in their lane”.
What sucks is that obscure regulations can trap otherwise law abiding people and place them in positions that can devastate a career or business. Then again, governments are quite good at creating such traps, for reasons we will probably never understand. If we look hard at the Part 107 rules we mind find more than a few “gotcha’s” in those.
