chat

Consider how idiotic it would be to have separate government-administrations for aircraft & spacecraft .. who fly through airspace on the way up, and down!

The correct divisions for transport should be something sorta-like:

• Sky, space, mil
• Sky, space, civilian, research
• Sky, space, civilian, commercial
• Sky, space, civilian, hobby
• Sky, air, mil
• Sky, air, civilian, research
• Sky, air, commercial, high altitude ( requiring a radar-altimeter )
• Sky, air, commercial, below that
• Sky, air, general aviation
• Sky, air, sailplanes
• Sky, air, powered 'chutes, etc
• Sky, air, unpowered 'chutes
• Waters, mil
• Waters, civilian, research
• Waters, powered
• Waters, sail
• Waters, human-powered
• Land, mil
• Land, Powered
• Land, e-assist
• Land, human-powered

...or something like that.

( the different powerplants should have their own categories of regulations, but under the same umbrella regime, sort-of a fractal-system of legislation, for clarity, like programming-modules, see? Limit scope to what that module covers. )

It is best to have the right granularity: "Aviation" is FAR too coarse a granularity.

I want AviationGovt as a separate category, so it is not cluttering-up other views, AND so it is easily-findable, see?

Same with GeneralAviation, or RegionalAviation ( which includes many issues that the big aerodromes don't have, like unpaved strips, or weird weather-conditions among remote places, or whatever, and oft have older aircraft, too )...

on LemmyFly.org I'd think it sanest to have a Space community, possibly separate ones for SpaceLaunches SpaceViewing ( people usually do more viewing than flying, right?
Astronomy is a "gateway drug" for some cubesat freaks : ) Space-Policy ( legal, international, politics, etc )

THESE ARE JUST IDEAS so dice 'em up however you want, eh?

( :