Question of the Week: The FAA's Proposed Rules for the Hudson River Corridor

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article
  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A

This Week's Question | Previous Week's Answers


Last week, we asked if more manufacturers should be granted the same latitude as Boeing to self-certify parts and processes or perhaps even wider powers of self-certification.

Judging by the response to last week's Question, reader opinions on this subject run the gamut. A narrow plurality of readers (33% of those who responded) said self-certification is acceptable for minor engineering and process changes, but anything more needs independent oversight. At the far end, only 7% of respondents said manufacturers shouldn't be able to move an inch without FAA approval, while 21% said the FAA is just in the way most of the time; manufacturers know their products better than anyone.

For a complete (real-time) breakdown of reader responses, click here.
(You may be asked to register and answer if you haven't already participated in this poll.)


The FAA is proposing rules that would segregate Hudson Class B Exclusion Area traffic by altitude and mandate common safety practices already used by many pilots. We'd like to know what you think of them, particularly the Class B VFR designation that is being proposed.

Do you support the FAA's proposed Hudson Exclusion Area revisions?
(click to answer)

Have an idea for a new "Question of the Week"? Send your suggestions to .

This address is only for suggested "QOTW" questions, and not for "QOTW" answers or comments.
Use this form to send "QOTW" comments to our AVmail Editor.