Does the FAA have any required timelines to respond to (or even acknowledge) petitions?

MarkH

MarkH

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
778
Location
Las Vegas
Display Name
Display name:
MarkH
I have been watching the status of this petition for a couple years now (because I like old planes and ADS-B requirements currently force me to limit my airplane shopping to planes with electrical systems).

But after almost 3 years of sitting on the docket, the FAA has not responded to the petition or even acknowledged its existence.

Is there any required timeline for the FAA to respond to petitions?

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FAA-2019-1009-0001
 
MarkH said:
I have been watching the status of this petition for a couple years now (because I like old planes and ADS-B requirements currently force me to limit my airplane shopping to planes with electrical systems).
Click to expand...
How do the current regs limit you to planes with electrical systems?
 
The petitioner is based at a class C airport. No electrical system, so he runs a transponder and ADS-B off a battery. If the transponder and ADS-B were only on while actually in the class C he'd have enough battery capacity, but once ADS-B is installed you're not allowed to turn it off, even in E or G airspace. So if you must fly in class C, you need an airplane with an engine driven electrical system.

Everything in the petition sounds reasonable, except for basing a Luscombe at El Paso International.
 
Lindberg said:
How do the current regs limit you to planes with electrical systems?
Click to expand...

For my specific situation, I live in Las Vegas and exiting the Las Vegas valley under the B and above the mountains anywhere other than following the interstate makes me really uncomfortable, especially if I am flying North or West from Henderson. The controllers here are great about working with you when making requests, but if I cannot legally enter the airspace, the controllers can't help me. In my case, if the petition was approved I would just use it when departing and when returning on (mostly) northbound routes. Can I work around it? Probably, but no matter how much I like flying simple little planes, it just doesn't make sense to fly one (without an electrical system).
 
you mean the agency which openly stonewalls the US CONGRESS, with zero retribution to the petty functionaries and their FERS pension protectorate? Even if we were to stipulate there was a legal imperative for them to respond to you in X days, that and $2.99 gets you a cup of cold coffee at McD in present circumstances.
 
It took 4 years for the SSRI petition to make it through…why might this be any different?
 
Have you reached out to the office of rulemaking?

I looked on aes.faa.gov, the FAA has never issued an exemption from 91.225.

I'm wondering if relief by exemption is even necessary give the regulation states "unless otherwise authorized by ATC" meaning ATO could issue a waiver.

Either way, I'd expect at least a close out letter if an exemption is not appropriate.
 
Last edited:
Hey, I like that petition! Might have to duplicate it and bump it in their system.
 
MarkH said:
I have been watching the status of this petition for a couple years now (because I like old planes and ADS-B requirements currently force me to limit my airplane shopping to planes with electrical systems).

But after almost 3 years of sitting on the docket, the FAA has not responded to the petition or even acknowledged its existence.

Is there any required timeline for the FAA to respond to petitions?

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FAA-2019-1009-0001
Click to expand...
Why do you not want an airplane with an electrical system? So you want to operate around very busy air space but not talk to anybody? It’s kind of like taking a Ford model T on the Washington beltway. Is it legal? maybe, but it doesn’t sound real smart.
 
Morgan3820 said:
Why do you not want an airplane with an electrical system? So you want to operate around very busy air space but not talk to anybody? It’s kind of like taking a Ford model T on the Washington beltway. Is it legal? maybe, but it doesn’t sound real smart.
Click to expand...
#1. Sometimes simple is fun, affordable, reasonable.
#2. It appears they already owned the plane, in a place where there are limited options for them to reasonably move the aircraft.
3. There are plenty of radio options that one can use portably, but they were asking to allow for the addition of a battery-powered ADS-B, but relief from the requirement to keep it on when they are in airspace outside of the C, which is honestly quite reasonable. I could theoretically keep my Luscombe airborne for 3 hours, and that would definitely stretch a reasonable-sized battery powering a transponder and ADS-B, in a weight-limited aircraft.
4. No, it's not like a model T on the Washington beltway. If they allowed for a battery-operated ADS-B, it would be pretty much the equivalent of a Cessna 150 in size, speed, and reliability.
 
I have filed two petitions for rulemaking over the years (though none recently). Both were dealt with pretty reasonably with the usual bureaucratic delays (somewhere between three and six months). In one, I tried to undo an undocument and in my mind inadvertent change to to the SIC rules that came from rearranging the section numbers. The FAA denial from John Lynch (who I have had several conversations with over the year and always found him to be an exasperating idiot and a clear example of why the FARs are the morass they are) spurious (and Ron Levy couldn't figure out why anything he said had anything to do with my suggestion for a straight forward change).

In the other case, I fixed the definition of night. Part 1 defined night in terms of a document that hadn't been published in decades. I wanted to substitute the correct citation. That one sailed through without even an NPRM as an editorial chnage.
 
RyanShort1 said:
#1. Sometimes simple is fun, affordable, reasonable.
#2. It appears they already owned the plane, in a place where there are limited options for them to reasonably move the aircraft.
3. There are plenty of radio options that one can use portably, but they were asking to allow for the addition of a battery-powered ADS-B, but relief from the requirement to keep it on when they are in airspace outside of the C, which is honestly quite reasonable. I could theoretically keep my Luscombe airborne for 3 hours, and that would definitely stretch a reasonable-sized battery powering a transponder and ADS-B, in a weight-limited .
Click to expand...
Buy two batteries. Wire in parallel. Problem solved.
Everyone wants it their way.
 
Morgan3820 said:
Buy two batteries. Wire in parallel. Problem solved.
Everyone wants it their way.
Click to expand...
I think you're missing the point. Say for sake of argument it takes 20 minutes to get in or out of the class C, and that your battery will power the transponder and ADS-B for 60 minutes. You want to fly to a destination two hours away, and have no way to charge the battery. You're not allowed to turn it off even in G airspace, so the battery will be dead before you even get to your destination. There may not be room for a battery that can last 4+ hours.

If he was allowed to turn it off once clear of the C, which in E or G is no different safety-wise from aircraft that don't have ADS-B at all, he'd have enough battery left to turn it back on to reenter the C at the end of the flight.
 
MarkH said:
For my specific situation, I live in Las Vegas and exiting the Las Vegas valley under the B and above the mountains anywhere other than following the interstate makes me really uncomfortable, especially if I am flying North or West from Henderson. The controllers here are great about working with you when making requests, but if I cannot legally enter the airspace, the controllers can't help me. In my case, if the petition was approved I would just use it when departing and when returning on (mostly) northbound routes. Can I work around it? Probably, but no matter how much I like flying simple little planes, it just doesn't make sense to fly one (without an electrical system).
Click to expand...
If you call and ask in advance for permission to enter with only Mode C, would they allow it?
 
RyanShort1 said:
Weight is the issue. Why wouldn’t you support this?
Click to expand...
1-2 gallons of gas. I have grown accustomed to seeing other aircraft on my ForeFlight. I have realized that visually identifying an airplane is often hit or miss. I have found adsb to be a useful tool regardless of where you are in the system. I have grown accustomed to having other planes announce their position and intention at uncontrolled fields.
 
Morgan3820 said:
I have found adsb to be a useful tool regardless of where you are in the system. I have grown accustomed to having other planes announce their position and intention at uncontrolled fields.
Click to expand...
Just don't forget that not all of us have ADS-B.

I do announce my position at uncontrolled airports, though.
 
Morgan3820 said:
https://marvgolden.com/uavionix-skybeacon-ads-b-out-transmitter-tso/?sku=UAX1001&msclkid=6ece7fe3cfe314daf71c1d0e878ad1b4&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=**LP - Shop - iPad Accessories&utm_term=4585100934219366&utm_content=iPad Accessories
specifications says it outputs 3 watts. Help me with my math but doesn’t that work out to be a quarter of an amp or one amp over a four hour flight? Seems to me as most 12v batteries would handle that.
Click to expand...

Add to that a mode C transponder, encoder, batteries, cables, switches, antenna, mounting brackets ... :dunno:
 
RyanShort1 said:
Weight is the issue. Why wouldn’t you support this?
Click to expand...

Because while El Paso is a sleepy class C and probably can support a pile of non-ADS-B planes, I don't want to fly around Oakland or San Jose (or Portland or Ontario or John Wayne or or or or...) with the same blind thicket?

I would counter the proposal by downgrading ELP's airspace.
 
schmookeeg said:
Because while El Paso is a sleepy class C and probably can support a pile of non-ADS-B planes, I don't want to fly around Oakland or San Jose (or Portland or Ontario or John Wayne or or or or...) with the same blind thicket?

I would counter the proposal by downgrading ELP's airspace.
Click to expand...

What ever did they do a few years ago before the ADS-B mandate . . . lol.
 
Morgan3820 said:
If it added 25 knots TAS he would find a way.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing for or against ... simply pointing out that adding ADSB to the plane requires more than just putting a lightweight, low power unit on the wingtip.

BTW ... I didn't get quite 25 knots when I upgraded mine! ;)
 
Morgan3820 said:
If it added 25 knots TAS he would find a way.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, and you do realize that plenty of Luscombe, Cub, Champ, whatnot owners already fly with less than their 12-14 gallons of gas capacity and 2 gallons takes away 30 minutes of flight time? You seem a little unaware of the charm and realities of that portion of aviation.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Not necessarily, and you do realize that plenty of Luscombe, Cub, Champ, whatnot owners already fly with less than their 12-14 gallons of gas capacity and 2 gallons takes away 30 minutes of flight time? You seem a little unaware of the charm and realities of that portion of aviation.
Click to expand...
Ok yall win this one. Unfortunately, I don’t matter.
 
Will the OPs transponder be permanently mounted in the aircraft or portable? If I remember correctly the FAA had an issue with portable ADS-B out units not wanting them ending up in different aircraft. I could be wrong.
 
edessa said:
Will the OPs transponder be permanently mounted in the aircraft or portable? If I remember correctly the FAA had an issue with portable ADS-B out units not wanting them ending up in different aircraft. I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge, there is not an approved portable solution (I would be interested to hear if there is one).

But for this petition is for permanently mounted solutions.
 
SoonerAviator said:
What ever did they do a few years ago before the ADS-B mandate . . . lol.
Click to expand...

:D Yeah I agree, and I am guilty of the nugget of hypocrisy in there, but the new stuff is GOOD for situational awareness, and promotes safety -- particularly near busy airspace which seems more congested to me in the last 10 years than it was in the pre-ipad bronze age. Which I would think is where the rule comes from.


...this argument could be ended to everyone's satisfaction if someone figured out how to allow something like the BOM to be ADS-B Out compliant.

https://shop.levil.com/products/bom
 
I just don't like the attitude that you can rely on adsb so heavily. It's an addition to situational awareness, not the primary instrument for it. Not everyone has it, it doesn't always work, and most importantly, the lag can sometimes make it worse than useless by giving you stale information.
 
Morgan3820 said:
it outputs 3 watts. Help me with my math but doesn’t that work out to be a quarter of an amp or one amp over a four hour flight?
Click to expand...
Actually, no. Doesn’t work that way. 3W RF output from a transmitter does not necessarily translate to 3W DC input to the device. And as has already been mentioned, there’s the required transponder that does have a significantly higher power requirement and output.
 
Salty said:
I just don't like the attitude that you can rely on adsb so heavily. It's an addition to situational awareness, not the primary instrument for it. Not everyone has it, it doesn't always work, and most importantly, the lag can sometimes make it worse than useless by giving you stale information.
Click to expand...
Perhaps..but Once I saw on FF that myself and a TBM were going to arrive at the field at the same time from opposite directions. The tower, i think did not appreciate the situation. I requested a 360 for separation. I did not have a visual until the TBM was on the ground. Glad we both had adsb.

But, again, I concede the argument.
 
DaleB said:
Actually, no. Doesn’t work that way. 3W RF output from a transmitter does not necessarily translate to 3W DC input to the device. And as has already been mentioned, there’s the required transponder that does have a significantly higher power requirement and output.
Click to expand...
Guess I was wrong all around. Not the first time.
 
Last edited:
Morgan3820 said:
Guess I was wrong all around. Not the first time.
Click to expand...
We don't hate you! Just trying to help you understand why this would be a net positive. As it is, I skirt around the DFW Bravo all the time NORDO in my Luscombe. Would I choose to equip my Luscombe in this manner if it was legal? Very possibly! That'd be one more airplane that the ADS-B dependent guys wouldn't be blind to.
 
schmookeeg said:
:D Yeah I agree, and I am guilty of the nugget of hypocrisy in there, but the new stuff is GOOD for situational awareness, and promotes safety -- particularly near busy airspace which seems more congested to me in the last 10 years than it was in the pre-ipad bronze age. Which I would think is where the rule comes from.
Click to expand...

It probably seems more congested because now you can see how much traffic was always there. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top