USAF = US Amphetamine Fools

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...

Come on folks, wake up... Despite lip service and soothing sounds offered
by their spokesman, the military arm of the federal government
demonstrates
daily that it is not bound by civilian rules, including the FAA rules...
I
will ask one rhetorical question for those who are not too brain dead to
think for themselves...
Where in 14 CFR, Part 91, et. al., does it authorize you to attach a fully
automatic machine gun on the aircraft, or a nuclear weapon, or napalm,
etc.,?

Military aircraft built after 1959 have little chance of even being
certificated for flight operations under CFR14.

Obviously it doesn't yet they do - Res Ipsa Loquitor / QED ...


Denny

. While in U.S. airspace Part
91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) governs the operation of
aircraft, both civilian and military.

obviously NOT!

D.

To add a bit of clarity to this part of thread.

Use of Dexedrine by aircrews is prescribed and monitored by Flight
Surgeons. You don't have jocks going off on their own and taking the
'pill'.

Many years of dispensing these 'pills' has shown it to be safe and it
SAVES lives and aircraft.

Following use, a adequate rest period is prescribed to make up for the
lack of sleep prior to further flight.

Works great after a non stop deployment half way around the world in a
fighter.

No pilots are ordered to take the 'pill'. If someone doesn't want to
for any reason, they have the option to not take.


Big John


On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:52:23 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 19:00:43 -0400, "Dennis O'Connor"
wrote in Message-Id:

flat out wrong (or lie) about the chemical family - Dexedrine
(dextroamphetamine sulfate) is not a narcotic...

Dextroamphetamine sulfate is a Schedule II controlled substance.
http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/902/055/095.htm

It is not, however, a narcotic.

It is, more specifically, the opposite of a narcotic.

And in the doses used by US airmen, it's more on the level of "lots of
coffee withtout the urination problem."

Where in 14 CFR, Part 91, et. al., does it authorize you to attach a
fully automatic machine gun on the aircraft, or a nuclear weapon, or
napalm, etc.,?

There doesn't need to be an authorization. There is no prohibition.

There are numerous exemptions in the FARs for military aircraft, and
there are a number of other blanket exemptions such as "Unless
authorized by the administrator".

The Administrator is capable of issuing exemptions for just about
every reg there is, and most likely has done so for the military. But
Part 91 gives the Administrator the right to do so.

Congress has no authority to make such a law, so how could delegated
Congressional authority lead to any such regulatory authority?

Here's a quote from the Cornell web page on military law:

-----snip--------
Congress's control over formation, organization and government of the
national armies is plenary and exclusive.
-----snip--------

You have failed to support your position, Greg, or to even know the
words.

I've given you the following
1) Statement by the FAA's general counsel's office
2) References to the FARs which contain military exemptions
3) FAR statements as to the applicability of the regs

All you've given me is statements based on your own authority.

Military aircraft built after 1959 have little chance of even being
certificated for flight operations under CFR14.

Part 91 only requires that "Civil" aircraft have an airworthiness
certificate.

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...
Congress has no authority to make such a law, so how could delegated
Congressional authority lead to any such regulatory authority?

Here's a quote from the Cornell web page on military law:

-----snip--------
Congress's control over formation, organization and government of the
national armies is plenary and exclusive.
-----snip--------

Congress' power is limited to funding and declaration of war. Any claim of
Congressional primacy over the military seems childish, in light of the past
30 years of American history. Even the enabling order giving DoD authority
over the military has been resinded, during this Administration.

You have failed to support your position, Greg, or to even know the
words.

I've given you the following
1) Statement by the FAA's general counsel's office
2) References to the FARs which contain military exemptions
3) FAR statements as to the applicability of the regs

All you've given me is statements based on your own authority.

I'll refer you to Article II section 2:

"The President shall be Commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the
United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called into
the actual service of the United States;"

Historically, this section of Article II is the explicit price George
Washinton required to become the first President of the Republic; no George
Washington, no Republic. Washington, commander of the Army of Virginia, was
the most powerful man in America at the time and refused to relinquish power
in order to be President.

I suggest that in the future, you post items you are capable of
understanding, Esres. As has been pointed out by other posters, the
Military has their own regulation bringing them into compliance with some
sections of CFR14, but this document is controlled by the military and is in
no way subject to FAA review.

"Greg Esres" wrote in message ...
-
There are numerous exemptions in the FARs for military aircraft, and
there are a number of other blanket exemptions such as "Unless
authorized by the administrator".

Actually, your "numerous exemptions" are limitted to a handfull in part 91.
The only part that even pretends to play military and civilian together.


The Administrator is capable of issuing exemptions for just about
every reg there is, and most likely has done so for the military. But
Part 91 gives the Administrator the right to do so.

The "Administrator" has no authority over the military or public aircraft,
only civil aviation.

The "Administrator" has no authority over the military or public
aircraft, only civil aviation.

You have not yet offered any support for that allegation.

That fact only seems to erode your other assertion, Esres.

How so?

"Greg Esres" wrote in message ...
The "Administrator" has no authority over the military or public
aircraft, only civil aviation.

You have not yet offered any support for that allegation.

Geez, I didn't realize people were going to be so thick about things.
The enabling legislation that gives the FAA regulationss authority is the Federal
Aviation Act of 1958. It's found in 49 USC 40101.