‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Allow babywearing carriers on planes

202 points · 277 comments · surprisetalk

  1. gregwtmtno · · focus · HN ↗
    I have a unique perspective on this as a former federal rulemaker. One thing you should know is that when it comes to rulemaking, the FAA isn't an ordinary rulemaker--they do the most of it and they're the best in the business. When I went to my intro to rule making classes, the FAA always rolled deep.

    If you want a change and you want to make sure the right people see your request, I suggest you start here:

    <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.transportation.gov&#x2F;regulations&#x2F;petitions" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.transportation.gov&#x2F;regulations&#x2F;petitions

    1. xp84 · · focus · HN ↗
      Why doesn&#x27;t the FAA usually implement the changes the NTSB raises after learning from crashes?
      1. alex_sf · · focus · HN ↗
        They do when appropriate after considering all concerns. The NTSB is solely concerned with safety. The best rulemaking is not literally safety-first or nothing would actually get done.
        1. MostlyStable · · focus · HN ↗
          See: Nuclear power for an example of this.
    2. ChicagoBoy11 · · focus · HN ↗
      As a student pilot, I got confused by a sign in the aeronautical charts, and wrote to the faa.

      I got to present in front of the aeronautical charting group, they discussed, and took up my change. It was a surreal experience. The level of depth, care, and just breadth of considerations to flip every possible stone to make flying infinitessimally safer was truly awe inspiring. The fact that me, a at-the-time-not-yet-even private pilot, was heard and taken super seriously, was equally amazing. Fully agree -- these people are the best in the biz.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.