"John R Weiss" wrote in message
news:js9%a.118426$cF.32710@rwcrnsc53...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote...

Posters confusing Part 91 for ATC and Type Certification is a major
contributor to those posters' confusion.

I haven't seen any evidence in this thread (or elsewhere in this forum)
that
anyone has been confused regarding Part 91 and Type Certification,
excepting the
possibility of confusion that might arise from your posts broaching the
subject.

Then you may have achieved a level of cognitive dissonance we seldom see
here at ram.

Also, nobody has made any assertion to the effect that "Part 91 is ATC" or
anything similar. The topic at hand does, however, include the fact that
military aircraft operations in US airspace are subject to ATC; and that
fact is
supported by 49 USC, 14 CFR, and various military regulations.

Military regulations are not in any way an indication that FAA has control
of military flight operations in the US. In fact, FAA Orders to ATC
indicate that ATC has a legal obligation to protect MOAs and an additional
obligation to respond immediately where special military operations are
under way. All this was well in evidence on 9-11, from a real world
operational standpoint.

I can tell from your postings that you have some emotional investment in
what you are writting Weiss, but that won't make it true. ATC is
consolidated under FAA control for safety and cost reasons, but that in no
way changed the Military's ability to operate in US airspace however and
whenever they need to. There was no intention in this consolidation to
imply FAA control of military operations.

John P. Tarver, MS/PE