MARTHA, MARTHA, MARTHA, SAY I T AIN’T SO!
I so enjoy Martha Lunken’s irreverent stories of past flying escapades. I can relate to many, and they consistently bring a smile to my face. But I was disappointed in your critique, Martha, of the FAASTeam [“Is the FAA Pulling a Fast One?” October]. Not so much for what you said, but what you left out. You used about two-thirds of your article to chastise the FAA bureaucrats and their cost. I am not competent to comment on that, but I am sympathetic to the notion that we have a very expensive government. But I wish you had focused on the zero-cost aspect of the program. I am an unpaid volunteer FAASTeam lead rep. I host a monthly Wings/IMC Club gatne•ing that is fairly well-attended by. as you would say, the "usual suspects.' I l ke tc con-pare us little" GA foks with "big' GA flight departments and the airlines. They have mandatory recurrent training, licensed dispatchers and significant redun-dancy and th s results in a fatal-accident rate that is much, much better than IttLe' GA. I like lc teach that in lieu of what they have, we have the Wings program for recurrent training, things like the PAVE checklist as our "dispatcher' and the flex 13E4 of time rather than reminded“little”there lotsto GA, policeof of it redundancy.theseis our all personal voluntary;things But frequently.actions therewe need— is and Andno to that oneforbe is faasafety.govbut a they good are thing.a website significantThe Wingsare structuralnot programthe whole componentand story, the of the GA safety effort.