Matthew T. Keefe - Exemption/Rulemaking
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Matthew T. Keefe - Exemption/Rulemaking
- Posted
- Apr 7, 2025
- Comment period
- Apr 7, 2025 – ?
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Sep 6, 2025Thane NormanSupportIndividual
The commenter, a former military pilot and flight instructor, supports the proposed action regarding SCT (Specialized Combat Training) credits. They argue that the duties of a Weapon Systems Officer (WSO) in an FA-18 are comparable to co-pilot duties and should count toward requirements for those who have transitioned to certified aircraft commanders.
Read comment → - Jul 8, 2025LUKE DELISIOSupportIndividual
Matthew T. Keefe, a former Navy Weapon Systems Officer (WSO) and current commercial pilot, supports the proposed action. He argues that the training and experience gained as a WSO in military aircraft directly translate to the skills required for civilian pilot certifications and ATP requirements.
Read comment → - Jun 5, 2025Bobby MartinSupportIndividual
Matthew T. Keefe, an Instructor Pilot, supports the proposed action based on his personal experience as a former Naval Flight Officer and current T-38C instructor. He argues that prior flight experience, particularly in fighter-type aircraft, significantly improves a student's ability to learn pilotage principles.
Read comment → - Jun 1, 2025Ramses PorrataSupportIndividual
The commenter, a retired military weapons systems officer, supports the FAA's proposed rulemaking to streamline the ATP/ATP-R process for military aviators. They argue that the change recognizes the relevant experience of veterans and helps address the commercial pilot shortage without compromising safety standards.
Read comment → - May 28, 2025Russ KlawitterSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed rule change to 61.159, arguing that military Weapons Systems Officers (WSOs) and Navigators (NFOs) undergo rigorous training and testing standards similar to FAA flight reviews. They emphasize that these aircrew members possess valuable flight deck experience and knowledge of FAR and AIM regulations.
Read comment → - May 24, 2025Aaron LawSupportIndividual
A former military weapons system officer and current airline pilot supports the proposed rule to allow fighter aircraft flight time to count toward the 1,500-hour ATP requirement. The commenter argues that the duties of weapons system officers are of equal or greater difficulty than those of airline pilots and provides specific examples of how the reduction should be calculated.
Read comment → - May 9, 2025Carlie GantarSupportIndividual
The commenter supports recognizing the experience of Weapon Systems Officers (WSOs) by the FAA. They argue that WSOs possess critical skills in navigation and communication that would benefit airline safety and provide career opportunities for military veterans.
Read comment → - May 7, 2025Timothy TendallSupportIndividual
Matthew T. Keefe, a retired military Weapons Systems Officer (WSO), argues that flight time served as a WSO should count toward ATP requirements. He contends that the rigorous training and responsibilities of a WSO provide skills equivalent to or better than civilian flight schools and suggests adapting Part 61.159 Flight Engineer time rules to include WSOs.
Read comment →
