Air Wagner..... He’s baaaaackk.

Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by Mike Blackburn, Nov 12, 2019.

  1. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    No, I see a lot of single engine airplanes do it, too.
     
  2. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    Watch the vid. Several runway stripes. Now, of course, the eye sees differently than the camera, but I can pretty much guarantee it wasn’t more than 1/4.
     
  3. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Sounds like it wasn’t 0/0, either.
     
  4. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    I guess that argument is back on the table? Assigned and accepted an ODP with 300-1 mins.
     
  5. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Apparently. It was clearly stated that he was taxiing in 0/0.
     
  6. PeterNSteinmetz

    PeterNSteinmetz Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,485
    Location:
    Tempe, AZ
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    PeterNSteinmetz
    Sounded like a good one. So I saved it for the collection.
     
    Z06_Mir likes this.
  7. Deelee

    Deelee Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,414
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Deelee
    My fault. But I operate under JFR. where you can make up things like minimums, visibility and ceilings. Under FAA-approved rules and definitions... yeah, I guess it wasn't 0/0. But this is JFR, ya'll...
     
  8. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    Takeoff minimums do not apply to Part 91.
     
    wayneda40 and PaulS like this.
  9. PaulS

    PaulS Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,590
    Location:
    New England
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    PaulS
    Oh my, lol, he was in a left turn immediately after liftoff when he should have been straight.
     
  10. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    But do the requirements of a DP apply to Part 91?
     
  11. N1120A

    N1120A Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    2,050
    Location:
    AG5B BE33 MYF
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    N1120A
    ASOS reported visibility of greater than 10 and doesn't report ceiling. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
     
  12. benyflyguy

    benyflyguy En-Route

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    3,014
    Location:
    NEPA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    benyflyguy
    That raises an interesting set of questions. Part of the freedom of part 91 is that departure minimums don’t apply so you can take off 0/0 if you want- not wise but can be below minimums if you wanted to go.
    if you get a clearance that includes a DP- I think you are bound to those minimums as they are designed with that in mind.
    So if you want to take off and are below the DP minimums can you just refuse that clearance and state why???
     
  13. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Seems to me the “weather minimums…for the airport” per 91.175 are different than DP minimums, but…:dunno:
     
  14. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    The takeoff minimums do not. However, pilots should determine that their aircraft meets the climb gradient, and must fly the routing since it was part of an ATC clearance.

    The 300-1 is listed on the DP under "Takeoff Minimums".

    Now, you and I both know that the takeoff minimums in general could be different for each runway at an airport, that doesn't mean that these minimums are somehow distinguished from "weather minimums for that airport" that 91.175 talks about.

    If you still are having trouble, consider the following thought experiment. 14 CFR 91.175 requires approach and landing minimums to be complied with, and takeoff minimums "for the airport" for 121, 125, 129, or 135 operations. Which regulation would require a Part 91 operator to comply with "takeoff minimums for a departure procedure"?
     
  15. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    We’re really splitting hairs here on the legalese, which is obviously gray (and a solid discussion point).

    However, the larger picture is that this is neither solid ADM nor solid execution of many aspects of flying. Due to that and the ignorance/hubris involved in producing the videos, it should not be held as an example of what to do as a pilot (as it pertains to the fact that it’s on a popular YT channel), and in fact should be held as an example of what not to do.

    If Mr. Wagner were more humble and open about his flying, we’d be having a different discussion.
     
    wayneda40 likes this.
  16. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    The same one that would require 1xx operators to comply with them.

    91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.
     
  17. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    Never heard ATC clear a pilot for weather minimums, or instruct them to adhere to a particular set of minimums. How does that even make sense?

    They are takeoff weather minimums, 91.175(f) tells you who has to follow them and who doesn't.
     
  18. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    So, to be clear, we’re cool with picking and choosing which parts of a published procedure we’re going to follow?
     
    benyflyguy likes this.
  19. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    If the DP is part of the ATC clearance, and the minimums are a part of the DP, it seems that anyone, regardless of which Part their operating under, must comply with them.
     
    Z06_Mir likes this.
  20. Salty

    Salty Final Approach

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    8,417
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    yeah, but you (I mean Jerry) knew that wasn’t true as you (I mean he) said “1/4 mile” to ATC.
     
    Deelee likes this.
  21. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    They are takeoff weather minimums, other than VFR or IFR ATC has no jurisdiction in dictating what a pilot's weather minimums are, the FARs do that. That's in addition to the fact that the takeoff is occurring in Class G airspace where ATC also has no jurisdiction.
     
  22. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    So climb requirements of the DP are optional as well?
     
  23. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    No one is picking, the FARs do that for you.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2021
  24. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,447
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    Wanna try again? ;)
    upload_2021-7-13_20-15-47.jpeg
     
  25. PaulS

    PaulS Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,590
    Location:
    New England
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    PaulS
  26. Squirrelfury

    Squirrelfury Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    32
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Squirrelfury
    I agree with DMS Pilot.

    In 1999, an individual queried the FAA as to whether ceiling and visibility minima contained in SID's were binding upon Part 91 pilots. The FAA responded,

    "... I am constrained to agree with your analysis that a Part 91 flight can depart in weather conditions less than the minima prescribed for the SID."​

    A SID can only be flown as part of a clearance. Thus, the FAA interpretation says that the departure procedure weather minima are not applicable even when that procedure is part of an IFR clearance. I understand that a SID isn't an ODP (like the one that Wagner was assigned in his video), but it's pretty close. If someone was dragged before an ALJ over this question, I think that that same interpretation that was applied to the SID, would also be found to apply similarly to the "less formal" ODP.
     
    benyflyguy, wayneda40 and dmspilot like this.
  27. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    No, I don't. I'm talking about takeoff minimums. The FARs are clear who they apply to and who they don't apply to. You want to deflect and argue about something else.
     
  28. TCABM

    TCABM Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,889
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    3G
    The only gotcha is that FAA interpretation of their own regulations is now questionable in the courts.
     
  29. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    Technically they are only clear as to who they apply unless specifically exclusive.

    Who they exclude, in the presence of other potentially applicable FARs and procedures, is an obvious matter of debate.
     
  30. LesGawlik

    LesGawlik Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    194
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Les
    They would not bust a Part 91 operator for violating take off minima. If something bad happened, they would bust him on 91.13. That's the Disorderly Conduct of aviation, meaning you're arrested if you do something the cops don't like, and you're convicted if it's something the judge doesn't like.
     
    iamtheari likes this.
  31. dmspilot

    dmspilot En-Route

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    4,484
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Display name:
    "Aircraft operating under 14 CFR Part 91 are not required to comply with established takeoff minimums. Legally, a zero/ zero departure may be made."

    Federal Aviation Administration
    Instrument Procedures Handbook
     
  32. Tarheelpilot

    Tarheelpilot Final Approach

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,275
    Location:
    North Carolina once again.
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tarheelpilot
    Part 91 can go 0/0 legally. If it was 1/4 mile when he took off that was still legal.
     
  33. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    12,616
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    actually, 91.13 is pretty much identical to "reckless driving" statutes in many states.
     
  34. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    12,616
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Always have been. The degree of deference given them can vary with the type of regulation but the ability to question regulatory agency's interpretations has been around for a long, long time.

    Perhaps you are thinking of the Pilot Bill of Rights legislation which removed the requirement for the NTSB to automatically follow FAA interpretations?
     
    wayneda40 and TCABM like this.
  35. TCABM

    TCABM Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,889
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    3G
    It was an attempt to pole fun at the Warbirds/LODA FAA interpretation.
     
  36. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    12,616
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Except the Court of Appeals agreed with the FAA, so it wasn't much of a challenge ;) (It was also predictable)
     
  37. Flying Keys

    Flying Keys Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2021
    Messages:
    19
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Flying Keys
    Here’s the hazardous attitude. Gets called out on the wrong turn and rationalizes (denial), “I wanted to get away from the terrain.” Well, that’s what the procedure is for, it’s literally an obstacle departure procedure. If you accepted the procedure, you don’t get to make up your own. But even more strange is that now it was a deliberate turn versus being an error? Come on, man, we clearly see you were confused.

    Also retconning a few things regarding minimums (denial again), regardless of legality.

    Wonder if he’s reading this thread. Jerry, it’s not okay behavior. Your lax attitude and excuses set a hazardous example to burgeoning pilots. A proper response would be “I did not take the time to understand the departure and was distracted by all my behavior in what should have been a sterile cockpit period, exacerbated by get-there-itis due to lowering minimums.”
     

    Attached Files:

  38. Tarheelpilot

    Tarheelpilot Final Approach

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,275
    Location:
    North Carolina once again.
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tarheelpilot
    Lively debate in this thread. I’m surprised. I figured it had settled down to NASCAR status.
     
    midlifeflyer likes this.
  39. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    12,616
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Funny. Lord knows I'm no fan of Jerry's IFR flying. But I didn't see the horrors in this one others did. Thought it pretty benign as Jerry flights go. Low vis takeoff. Making an unnecessary turn and then turning back because he didn't realize the course to EBYIB was really just runway heading with positive RNAV course guidance right there on his HSI, but understanding procedures has never been a strong point for him. Pretty ho-hum.
     
    wayneda40 likes this.
  40. eman1200

    eman1200 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    13,808
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    eman1200
    you kinda say the same thing just about every time. however, understand that we ALL make mistakes, but jerry does the same stuff over and over and over, and some stuff is MUCH worse than others. so then it becomes easy to pick out even the minor stuff and give him a hard time about it. if you watched someone's videos and they were almost always a solid pilot, you wouldn't really think twice about a minor mistake they made. when you're the king of crap piloting, the little stuff will also be brought to the table. and he deserves it.