FAA’s Masterclass in Responsiveness: A Case Study in How Not to Schedule a Meeting

We first approached Dr. Susan Northrup — the Federal Air Surgeon — during her own public forum at Oshkosh, over a month ago. When we posed our question, her response appeared to be one of genuine concern and care. She seemed to share a desire to make meaningful change, not just to the HIMS program, but to FAA Aeromedical policy as a whole.

For a brief moment, we believed this might mark a turning point.

Fast-forward to today.

More than a month later, we still do not have a single confirmed date for a meeting. What we do have is a string of polite but circular responses, multiple deferrals, and every appearance that the FAA is doing everything possible to avoid putting anything on the calendar. When dates are mentioned, they’re immediately pushed off or redirected.

The ball is now squarely in the FAA’s court. We’ve formally requested that Dr. Northrup herself give us a list of dates she is available, but as of now, we have received no commitment — only more delay.

If this is the FAA’s version of “partnership” with the industry, one shudders to think what “resistance” must look like. Pilots are expected to meet deadlines, follow procedures, and respond promptly to federal directives. Yet when pilots ask for a seat at the table to discuss reform, the government’s timeline becomes conveniently indefinite.

We’ll be here — ready to meet — whenever the FAA decides to take its own promises seriously.