Well, my interpretation is that you have to understand that the FAA is NOT an aviation agency, or a safety agency - it is a regulatory agency. . . What they want "To ensure consistency and standardization" of is the application of regulations, not the consistency of the airplanes. It is not about airplanes - it is about regulations....as usual!
This is true. The FAA, or perhaps I should say the people who work for this government agency, for the most part, is/are not interested in anything other than their own agency survival and/or individual job survival. I made this statement on a previous thread concerning build centers. They are in essence in it for their own
BUREAUCRATIC PRESERVATION. Their job is to make rules and regulations. If they do not do so on a regular basis their budgets will be cut and people will lose jobs and retirements and pensions and insurance coverage and position. If it means their paycheck they care. Otherwise, they could care less what their actions mean to the aviation community.
I, for one, believe that custom-built airplanes by boutique builders would be safer, and a great way to build up general aviation which is drowning under the high cost of regulation and certification. But unfortunately, the current regulations do not allow it. We have to live within the rules, or get the rules changed to what we want. Ignoring or going around them just makes "The Bear" mad - and we WILL be paying the price.
Yes, anyone who does not believe that someone with multiple build experience will be able to build a more consistently safe airplane than a raw amateur should not be in the business of regulating anyone!
Like most things involving the government, this regulation change and the regulations it is designed to replace were never intended to be rooted in safety. This is flat out an issue of government regulation designed to protect their regulatory power over the manufacturing sector of the aviation industry. If anyone can be allowed to build and then sell an airplane without following the already defined regulations of the FAA then why should the existing businesses (Cessna, Piper, etc.) have to follow the stringent certification requirements?
They would lose control over those commercial manufacturers if they allowed everyone to build and sell airplanes. Heaven forbid this to happen! How in the world could we poor soles protect ourselves from our own stupidity without a strong government and its regulatory agencies to tell us when, where, how, what we should do. Using common sense and a self-imposed sense of "not wanting to kill myself" is not adequate. No, I need these bureaucrats to tell me what is correct and appropriate in order to keep me from killing myself and all of those children in the school bus I am for sure going to crash into.
I did not intend to go off on yet another tangent, but I actually have coined my own phrase for this concept. I have become so tired of hearing all kinds of people discuss the safety of something, or explaining why they are deciding to do XYZ in terms of how it is important because we must "protect the children". I have labeled this concept as the
FOR THE CHILDREN SYNDROM! The next time you watch a television news report about some accident, note how often the reporter mentions the children involved in the "whatever".
"Adults? Well, I don't remember exactly how many adults were involved in the accident, but, Oh My God, can you believe there were two CHILDREN in that car!?"
Well, my .02 worth if anyone cares. After all, I am no longer a child (although I am often still treated as one) so I suppose there really is no real reason you would care?