Mr. President,
I am under no illusion that you would actually read the following. However, in the oft chance that someone might show it to you, please, please give it your attention.
I am an active airline test pilot and FAA designated examiner. I was recently forced to relinquish my duties as a line captain due to my having turned 60. Mr. President, I am sharper now professionally, and in better health, than I was 20 years ago. I have been a captain since 1971. That is a lot of experience to waste. The FAA Age 60 rule is political idiocy. It is time to rectify this and it really falls upon you to bring some sense back into the FAA and DOT. There are a couple of congressional bills which could go a long way to fixing this. Yet, the 9-11 tragedy put these bills at the bottom of the pile. The traveling public deserves seasoned captains more now than ever.
The Age 60 Rule allows me to fly (post age 60) the same aircraft, with the same crew(s), to the same destinations, with the same passengers as long as these passengers do not pay for their ticket… This rule gives a whole new meaning to the term idiotic!
The following column spells out more reasons for you to relieve Mr. Mineta and Ms. Garvey. Mr. President, you are in a position to become one of the greatest presidents in the history of our country. I can envision you being added to Mr. Rushmore just by the way you have handled the global crisis caused by terrorists. I say this not to patronize you, but to encourage you to continue to do the right thing. Resolving the Age 60 Rule is the right thing to do as is relieving Mr. Mineta and Mrs. Garvey.
“By:Martin Gross
By this time, it should be obvious to all thinking Americans that the Federal Aviation Administration is dysfunctional and a threat to our security. The recent study in which a majority of guns and knives passed through airport security — plus the unwise edict by Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta that we should not "discriminate" against Middle Eastern Muslim young men — have shown the agency is not only inept but wedded to a politically correct stance that might yet result in death to many of our citizens.
This was brought home to me forcefully on my return from Florida, when five aged citizens, including a 79-year-old woman with severe osteoporosis, were pulled out of line to be searched, along with their baggage, while able-bodied 25-year-olds were let through without incident.
Now, the head of the FAA, Jane Garvey, has taken the department's stance one step further to a caricature of ignorance, even a dangerous one. Last week, in an interview with Ann McFeatters, the distinguished Washington bureau chief of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Mrs. Garvey was asked her opinion of a piece of airline security hardware, the Secure 1000 body scanner, which is being tested at an airport to screen passengers. Her answer only reinforced the opinion that the FAA is a pronounced threat to our security.
The machine reportedly uses low level X-rays to "undress" passengers by projecting on a color monitor a full-body portrait, showing clearly what they are carrying or concealing below their clothes, identifying each object. The manufacturer, which presently sells other equipment to the FAA, claims the machine can spot metal, plastic, dynamite, C-4 explosives, ceramics, wood and other items a terrorist would want to hide. The FAA was sufficiently interested to order prototypes to try out the ingenious device, which would speed airline travel and weed out any potential terrorist, including people like the would-be shoe bomber.
Operators of the machine, which is so sensitive it can expose the passenger's private parts, would of course be segregated by sex. That is, a female operator would scan females, and vice versa for males — making sure the monitor could not be seen by the public. This is little different than exposing oneself to a same-sex attendant in a locker room, and it also would stop the onerous practice of male inspectors feeling the body of females as they search their person, something that has greatly annoyed the flight attendants union.
But the important criterion is whether the Secure 1000 body scanner is accurate — for if it is, it will revolutionize the airport screening operation, making it near-perfect.
Mrs. Garvey, when asked about the Secure 1000, allowed that it might be useful in checking baggage. But what about screening passengers who might be terrorists? Oh no. Mrs. Garvey said she was "uncomfortable" with the scanner and doubted the FAA would approve the machine for screening airport passengers. Why? Because, she responded, "It raises tremendous privacy issues."
Her response labels Mrs. Garvey as an inept administrator who uses political correctness, not safety, as her guide. To think that modesty, especially distorted modesty, should be used as a barrier to secure skies is almost impossible to imagine, even in a federal bureaucrat.
The remedy? Obviously Mrs. Garvey should be relieved of her job by President Bush, who in the final analysis must bear responsibility for those who work for him.”
Thank you, Mr. President, for your continued great leadership. I look forward to your public response to these challenges.
Captain Billy Walker
Hi Guys,
This is a great letter to a President that may very well help us out on this one. For those of you so inclined - I encourage you to write a note to the White House when you write your Senators and Representatives. Each and every one helps a lot.
Captain Ron Richtsmeier
PAAD
Vice - Chairman
web designs by RESCO Solutions
©2000 RESCO
Solutions. All rights reserve