What Power Does the FAA Have?

Lowflynjack said:
I’ve seen a lot of old men who decide they will just keep flying their planes once they lose their medical. Their sentiment is always, “What can the FAA do? Take my license? That won’t stop me.” Maybe I’ll be one of them someday.

I used to think that they were taking a big risk, but I no longer feel that way..
Click to expand...

I am becoming more and more convinced that the government rules primarily by intimidation.
 
Doc Holliday said:
I seriously doubt the FAA is going to go to the trouble (and legal ramifications) to go read someone's facebook or what other gooblygook social media that is in "private" mode. And then there are questions on just how private it really is (referring to the provider).

Social media is a plague on society IMO. If you want privacy, stay off of social media.
Click to expand...
No, the FAA, and all the other government agencies, including the NSA, need to go back and honor the intent of the 4th amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their papers, and that should include written communication with friends - digital or analog - set to "private" or "friends only" unless they actually go get a warrant.
If the problem is real enough that it warrants a warrant, go get the warrant and fully prosecute the deal.
 
Doc Holliday said:
People use social media and post all sorts of things about themselves. And it's free to anyone who wants to read it. Think about it.

Not sure how you could feel "threatened" when it is you posting the information online. o_O
Click to expand...

Agree why wouldn't they? I use social media all the time to check out potential employees when my kids were younger (adults now) I used it to see what kind of kids they were hanging out with.

Bottom line is the FAA knows about this guy and either they don't have the evidence or they just don't care and are not doing anything . No amount of additional snitching or regulating is going to change that.

I would also wager that the people that ride with him know what is going on. If something sounds to good to be true it probably is and they are also playing the risk reward game just like anyone else.
 
RyanShort1 said:
What if it was posted in "private" mode and only available to my friends and apparently government agencies trolling? That and other reasons is why I no longer have Facebook...
Click to expand...

Oh man! No search warrant is required to read “poison pen” crap that your friends submit to law enforcement. Also, it really isn’t that hard for a LEO to submit a request to Facebook to view the information. Search warrants aren’t that hard to get so long that they are just.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RyanShort1 said:
No, the FAA, and all the other government agencies, including the NSA, need to go back and honor the intent of the 4th amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their papers, and that should include written communication with friends set to "private" unless they actually go get a warrant.
If the problem is real enough that it warrants a warrant, go get the warrant and fully prosecute the deal.
Click to expand...

Again, your beef is with the provider, not the government.
 
YooperMooney said:
Oh man! No search warrant is required to read “poison pen” crap that your friends submit to law enforcement. Also, it really isn’t that hard for a LEO to submit a request to Facebook to view the information. Search warrants aren’t that hard to get so long that they are just.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yeah, but stuff about my infant daughter is not part of that.
Doc Holliday said:
Again, your beef is with the provider, not the government.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and as I said, I did make changes because of that.
 
Lowflynjack said:
I’ve seen a lot of old men who decide they will just keep flying their planes once they lose their medical. Their sentiment is always, “What can the FAA do? Take my license? That won’t stop me.” Maybe I’ll be one of them someday.
Click to expand...
I've heard this too.. and it makes me cringe
Grum.Man said:
flying is a very honor based system
Click to expand...
Indeed it is.. and when you see people abuse that the only thing that can come from that is more regulation and government

Sad
 
DFH65 said:
Agree why wouldn't they? I use social media all the time to check out potential employees when my kids were younger (adults now) I used it to see what kind of kids they were hanging out with.

Bottom line is the FAA knows about this guy and either they don't have the evidence or they just don't care and are not doing anything . No amount of additional snitching or regulating is going to change that.

I would also wager that the people that ride with him know what is going on. If something sounds to good to be true it probably is and they are also playing the risk reward game just like anyone else.
Click to expand...

I think they can look at your social media, but it would be hard to use it in court without further evidence. I can write that I'm an F-16 pilot on the internet, but the truth is I only photograph them.

I would not bet on the people flying with him knowing. He's flying a single-engine plane and his rates aren't so low that you'd feel like you were getting a great deal. Also, if you're not in aviation, you may not even know what is required to give commercial flights. I'm sure 90% of non-pilots have no idea.
 
Here is a picture of the guy if anyone wants to drop a dime on him.
latest
 
Tantalum said:
I've heard this too.. and it makes me cringe

Indeed it is.. and when you see people abuse that the only thing that can come from that is more regulation and government

Sad
Click to expand...
It's only a given because those same laws are ineffective and a waste of ink and other laws already on the books aren't enforced. Sadly, most of the pilots that actually killed people are certificated, too. I'd rather let some of those 70 year olds fly and worry more about the guys that aren't as well trained but legal. Both are problematic to a degree, but one is actually more dangerous. SAT actually used to have an examiner (My first DPE) who was in the category of the old guy that decided to fly license / cert or not and he was absolutely a safe pilot from what I and others could tell. It was political, not safety.
 
CharlieD3 said:
I've heard that Alaska has many pilots that have no license, and never have.
Click to expand...

Had a nice chat with a pair of FAA reps. I asked them about the "Wild West" Alaska situation and why the regs weren't enforced like the lower 48. Their reply "too remote, too many bears, too many guns".
 
It's not so much the FAA....but the power of the Federal gummint you'd have to deal with. The FAA will recommend action....other gummint agencies will do the deeds.
 
Lowflynjack said:
...I would not bet on the people flying with him knowing. He's flying a single-engine plane and his rates aren't so low that you'd feel like you were getting a great deal. Also, if you're not in aviation, you may not even know what is required to give commercial flights. I'm sure 90% of non-pilots have no idea.
Click to expand...

Being single engine and small number of passengers he probably isn't a huge risk or a high priority in the eyes of the FAA. I am certain they have bigger fish to fry.
 
MBDiagMan said:
This whole thing brings up a question in my mind:

My SIL used to work for the NTSB. I went to a party one time and met all the folks that she worked with and at times visited her office. They had a courtroom in the facility and one of the guys I met was a pilot and a full blown judge. All his co-workers even called him judge.

No pain, I realize that the NTSB is not the FAA, but what cases do the NTSB try.
Click to expand...
The NTSB acts as an administrative court for FAA certificate enforcement actions - suspension and revocation of FAA certificates. A single NTSB Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) does the trial, taking testimony, etc. The full NTSB acts as a first level court of appeals to review the ALJ decision. A party not liking that decision can appeal into the federal court system.

(graphic is from a pre "Compliance Program" presentation. Other than an additional orange box, it's the same)

upload_2020-1-14_12-6-31.jpeg

FAA civil penalty actions follow a different route.

For criminal process, it's outside both the FAA and NTSB. The FAA makes a referral to the Justice Department which then decides whether to prosecute. If it does it goes to the US Attorney's office for the pilot's district or a district where the event occurred.
 
Last edited:
I was subpoenaed to testify in an action against a friend accused of operating commercially without a 135 cert. The FAA did the deposition. The guy doing it was another friend. That was an uncomfortable situation. My (pilot) friend got a 6 month suspension of pilot privileges and I believe a fine. All administered by the FAA. He got his 135 the following year.
 
Half Fast said:
Did you read the very first post?

"They bust him on the ramp with a paying passenger and a couple who aren’t paying. Police cars everywhere, very dramatic. "​
Click to expand...
Yes, they apprehended him and gave him whatever punishment they felt was warranted. Are they supposed to continue to punish him of the one transgression? Oh, he's still at it. How do they know? How are they going to prove their case to the DOJ so they can initiate criminal proceedings?

You guys are hysterically funny. You claim that the government can do no right, but you seem to think that government employees are psychic. I will say again for those of limited reasoned comprehension, if the FAA wants to initiate criminal proceedings, which is really their only leverage against an unlicensed pilot, they need evidence to make their case. When the guy crashes again they'll have it, and they'll lower the boom at that point. The security cameras at the airport don't report to the FAA. Jack doesn't seem to be doing jack about it but complaining here. So the guy goes on his merry, and will continue to do so until there's another event. My only hope is the event doesn't claim lives.
 
Last edited:
NordicDave said:
Had a nice chat with a pair of FAA reps. I asked them about the "Wild West" Alaska situation and why the regs weren't enforced like the lower 48. Their reply "too remote, too many bears, too many guns".
Click to expand...

Might as well say "Too many FREE people."

Aviation is one place where I kinda believe in National/Federal oversight. It's really easy to cross state lines @ 110knots and greater. OTR trucking likewise... I guess. Though OTR trucking just seems to be $ oriented.

Alaska is a bit unique, Hawaii would be, too. Isolated as they are from the contiguous 48... That said, there's a whole lot less "freedom" in Hawaii than Alaska.

As usual, regarding privileges, the law abiding suffer as a result of the less honorable.

Shame, that carries over to rights as well (it shouldn't).
 
mryan75 said:
That's just not true, unless you think that jail, fines, and asset forfeiture, along with the possibility of civil litigation, doesn't "hurt".

You hear this argument all the time, and the only logical conclusion of it is total anarchy. You can say that about any law.
Click to expand...
??? No, it's not anarchy, and I never said no laws. Laws must be just, simple, and effective. Like, honest, go back to the 10 Comm... Which of those is this guy violating?
 
RyanShort1 said:
??? No, it's not anarchy, and I never said no laws. Laws must be just, simple, and effective. Like, honest, go back to the 10 Comm... Which of those is this guy violating?
Click to expand...

Correct I would never suggest anarchy, minarchy maybe but anarchy no. ;)

This is what is likely to happen...

 
steingar said:
I will say again for those of limited reasoned comprehension, if the FAA wants to initiate criminal proceedings, which is really their only leverage against an unlicensed pilot, they need evidence to make their case. When the guy crashes again they'll have it, and they'll lower the boom at that point. The security cameras at the airport don't report to the FAA. Jack doesn't seem to be doing jack about it but complaining here. So the guy goes on his merry, and will continue to do so until there's another event. My only hope is the event doesn't claimant lives.
Click to expand...

You're right, I'm not doing anything here but bringing it up. I'm not planning to do anything either. This guy has already shown he's not stable (in many more ways than I posted here). He carries and AR-15 with him every time he flies and is wearing an ATF hat so if they see him on camera, they won't recognize him. I'm not a detective, but they are investigators - it's in their title. They can request footage from the security cameras and at least see he's still flying after they revoked his license.

Why do they need more evidence? I guess you're setting the limit that it will take another accident. He crashed and they said they know he was flying for hire that day. Then they catch him again flying for hire. Then they suspend his license and find out he just ordered another one and kept flying. When is enough evidence enough?
 
Lowflynjack said:
... When is enough evidence enough?
Click to expand...

Is it possible he is not as dirty as you think? Or that you don't have all the information?

For the record carrying an AR15 on every flight or wearing an ATF hat is not necessarily the definition of instability.

Maybe he is flying for the CIA like in that Tom Cruise movie.
 
TommyG said:
I know guys that got all their ratings and then all of a sudden they somehow have 1500 hours and get hired by the airlines.
Click to expand...
This actually works? Hmmmmm
 
Lowflynjack said:
You're right, I'm not doing anything here but bringing it up. I'm not planning to do anything either. This guy has already shown he's not stable (in many more ways than I posted here). He carries and AR-15 with him every time he flies and is wearing an ATF hat so if they see him on camera, they won't recognize him. I'm not a detective, but they are investigators - it's in their title. They can request footage from the security cameras and at least see he's still flying after they revoked his license.
Click to expand...

How do they know to request footage from your cameras? Who told them? What day, what time? Do you really think FAA employees have the time to review hours and hours of security footage?

Lowflynjack said:
Why do they need more evidence? I guess you're setting the limit that it will take another accident. He crashed and they said they know he was flying for hire that day. Then they catch him again flying for hire. Then they suspend his license and find out he just ordered another one and kept flying. When is enough evidence enough?
Click to expand...

It's a little thing in our laws called Double Jeopardy. Nothing to do with the game show, I promise. It goes like this: if govco in some form initiates proceedings against you for some infraction and you get off, the same branch of govco can't do it again. They can try and get you for a different infraction, or a different govco entity can go after you. A good example is facing State criminal charges and then having to face Federal Civil Rights charges for the same offense. Yes, it's happened.

Now, if the FAA gets evidence of a second set of offenses, they can ratchet up the bar to primal proceedings provided their case is strong. They have a record of behavior (first offense, as you point out) and now they have evidence he went right along doing it. Photographs of him getting in and spooling up from Ace Detective and photographer extraordinaire Jack Fleetwood (a gumshoe's name if ever I heard it) might be enough. Complaints from pilots and personnel at the airport would help as well. Moreover, if said complaints contain specifics as to timed location, the investigating FAA person can actually review said security footage with some hope of success.

Moreover, if he really is carrying a loaded semiautomatic weapon into an aircraft he may be in violation of more than one state or Federal firearm regulation, since aircraft have a bad habit of crossing state lines. If the FAA won' shut him down the ATF might. They're cops, they have powers of criminal investigation and arrest.

Now I'm going to tell you why you should do this. You can see the guy's a danger both to himself and his passengers, not to mention innocent folks on the ground. How are you going to feel when he crashes and kills and innocent person? You have some skin in this, since you knew it was going on and did nothing but ***** on a message board. It's no different than seeing someone assaulted with the means of stopping it, and you do nothing.
 
Some of you guys paint a picture of FAA enforcement being the stereotypical overweight, overstressed, divorced, and alcoholic detectives portrayed on cable television.

dc044eadb4eded6e32e97e093637ea06.jpg


Far from it. They have a job to do and respond to leads submitted by the public. Definitely not real boogeymen that don’t have any superpowers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
steingar said:
How do they know to request footage from your cameras? Who told them? What day, what time? Do you really think FAA employees have the time to review hours and hours of security footage?



It's a little thing in our laws called Double Jeopardy. Nothing to do with the game show, I promise. It goes like this: if govco in some form initiates proceedings against you for some infraction and you get off, the same branch of govco can't do it again. They can try and get you for a different infraction, or a different govco entity can go after you. A good example is facing State criminal charges and then having to face Federal Civil Rights charges for the same offense. Yes, it's happened.

Now, if the FAA gets evidence of a second set of offenses, they can ratchet up the bar to primal proceedings provided their case is strong. They have a record of behavior (first offense, as you point out) and now they have evidence he went right along doing it. Photographs of him getting in and spooling up from Ace Detective and photographer extraordinaire Jack Fleetwood (a gumshoe's name if ever I heard it) might be enough. Complaints from pilots and personnel at the airport would help as well. Moreover, if said complaints contain specifics as to timed location, the investigating FAA person can actually review said security footage with some hope of success.

Moreover, if he really is carrying a loaded semiautomatic weapon into an aircraft he may be in violation of more than one state or Federal firearm regulation, since aircraft have a bad habit of crossing state lines. If the FAA won' shut him down the ATF might. They're cops, they have powers of criminal investigation and arrest.

Now I'm going to tell you why you should do this. You can see the guy's a danger both to himself and his passengers, not to mention innocent folks on the ground. How are you going to feel when he crashes and kills and innocent person? You have some skin in this, since you knew it was going on and did nothing but ***** on a message board. It's no different than seeing someone assaulted with the means of stopping it, and you do nothing.
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying, but I've done about as much as I'm going to do at this point, which is very little. I understand they suspended his license while they're investigating. Maybe this isn't over. They may have more than I know, it's not like they're checking in with me.

The weapon didn't phase them. He had video of someone flying in the back of his plane with the doors off shooting it. They told him it wasn't wise, but not really illegal. It wasn't hunting, just firing it.

Remember I didn't start the conversation asking what I could do. I started by asking if the FAA even had the power to do anything. I understand they don't have the manpower to stake him out, but they could ask the airport manager to report when his plane takes off and pull the video. I'm sure he would comply.

It is a little different than someone being assaulted and not doing anything. I have seen his website and heard him talk about operating commercially. I've never seen him load people in a plane for a commercial ride and depart. He does this at nicer airports, so even though he's told me, it's nothing I can prove. I've seen his flight path follow exactly what he advertised as local sight-seeing flights, but so has the FAA. They told him as much. The most I could prove now is that he's flying when he's not supposed to be. I keep my camera pointed at airplanes (not his) for now.
 
I suppose he could be working for ATF, FBI, CIA or any other alphabet entity.

As could his passengers... Or at least some of them. Some of the time...

I know that's far fetched. But, it is a possibility. If true, you'll never see him stop flying... Until he's needed somewhere else.
 
The FAA uses the DOT Office of the Inspector General special agents to investigate cases in which criminal activity is suspected, then turn over any evidence from the investigation to the U.S. Attorney in the federal district where the alleged criminal offense occurred.

Ask me how I know.
 
Lowflynjack said:
So months go on and he gets another plane and resumes commercial operations. This time he has ADS-B Out. So they watch his flights and see he’s flying into KSAT... where the FAA is! They bust him on the ramp with a paying passenger and a couple who aren’t paying. Police cars everywhere, very dramatic. After talking to him for awhile, the investigator tells him he’s now limited to flying with no passengers at all. Then they tell him they don’t want him to fly with passengers, but if he were to load his friends up and go, they can’t stop him, but he’s just adding more and more to his file. Scary, right? Not really.
Click to expand...

If the FAA won't enforce their rules or get another agency to enforce them, why should he pay attention to them?
 
UngaWunga said:
If the FAA won't enforce their rules or get another agency to enforce them, why should he pay attention to them?
Click to expand...
Lots of people have said the same thing about the IRS until they found themselves in jail.
 
Lowflynjack said:
The weapon didn't phase them. He had video of someone flying in the back of his plane with the doors off shooting it. They told him it wasn't wise, but not really illegal. It wasn't hunting, just firing it.
Click to expand...

Did this guy have a Youtube video a few years ago showing discharging the gun into the Gulf of Mexico?

There used to be an airport near me (closed now), that your chances of meeting a certificated pilot were EXTREMELY low, although traffic there was very steady. About 50% of the "pilots" departing that field would stay low a couple of extra seconds to go UNDER the wires at the east end of the runway as a show off maneuver ... lots of low level aileron rolls after takeoff also.
 
Lowflynjack said:
The weapon didn't phase them. He had video of someone flying in the back of his plane with the doors off shooting it. They told him it wasn't wise, but not really illegal. It wasn't hunting, just firing it.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, possession of firearms in the US is legal. The FAA aren't the guys to enforce infractions of that nature anyway.

Lowflynjack said:
Remember I didn't start the conversation asking what I could do. I started by asking if the FAA even had the power to do anything. I understand they don't have the manpower to stake him out, but they could ask the airport manager to report when his plane takes off and pull the video. I'm sure he would comply.
Click to expand...
And a whole bunch of people have told you exactly what the FAA can do and what it would take to get them to do it.

Lowflynjack said:
It is a little different than someone being assaulted and not doing anything. I have seen his website and heard him talk about operating commercially. I've never seen him load people in a plane for a commercial ride and depart. He does this at nicer airports, so even though he's told me, it's nothing I can prove. I've seen his flight path follow exactly what he advertised as local sight-seeing flights, but so has the FAA. They told him as much. The most I could prove now is that he's flying when he's not supposed to be. I keep my camera pointed at airplanes (not his) for now.
Click to expand...

In other words, you have no proof whatsoever that he's doing anything illegal other than flying when he shouldn't. Yet you denigrate the FAA for doing nothing. The law doesn't operate on hearsay, thankfully.
 
Lowflynjack said:
I guess that's what made me bring up this topic. What would it take to make the FAA feel strongly about this? L.
Click to expand...
Sadly probably a smoking hole. Then they’ll turn around and claim too many cases, overworked, understaffed etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top