Originally Posted by
MechEngr
I am not ignorant of aviation, thanks very much. The political reason FAA exists is to reassure the flying public that aircraft and aviation are safe, not primarily to ensure that aircraft are safe. They removed it from the charter as it was a visible conflict of interest, not because they were changing their attitude about it.
More people die in the USA every year under FAA management in GA crashes than in the two 737 MAX crashes. Ever see the FAA demand before Congress more authority to decrease those deaths? Nope. Because makers of general aviation equipment want the public to remain confident in their products and operations and their lobbyists are in Congressional offices. So FAA papers over the flaws and reassures the flying public.
Pretty sure the folks in the parts of the FAA that manage the operations of the NAS would bristle, even if only slightly, at the . . . jaundiced overall indictment of the agency. Beyond that, as the part of the federal interagency that operates the National Airspace System, I think your characterization of its reason for being is incomplete and to that extent at least incorrect.
On whether FAA's role and responsibilities for safety in any and all sectors of aviation in the United States is infected and corrupted by conflict of interest, I'd pay good hard-earned lowly cabdriver money to watch a moderated discussion between someone advocating the viewpoint you articulated about conflict of interest and, say, a recent or current Administrator. Maybe recent would be better, because unconstrained by political static and signals in D.C. (Part of your viewpoint refutes itself. FAA doesn't need or want to "promote" aviation, because the armies of lobbyists have that task list constantly "in work", as you contend.)
Insofar as commercial aviation has an excellent safety record in the United States, why would anyone think FAA needs to reassure the public of something that has become a cliche - flying on an airliner is safer than any other form of transportation. It's a cliche, and it's the truth, too, is it not?
As to GA, what solution would be recommended? No to product liability law reform, or, bring on the trial lawyer bar? Tight up licensing rules so fewer persons who shouldn't be operating an aircraft cannot do so?
Just in case, totally just contingency - anyone who regards you as ignorant is a complete fool.