Icon A5 lands on river causing inadvertent fire department response

Peter Anderson said:
Not what i was taught during my PPL. Which was a few months ago. You need to establish 2 way comms with the tower prior to entering the Delta. I have personally heard over the radio 2 different pilots get deviations from not doing this.
Click to expand...
Yes, you have to have two-way communications with the tower, but doesn't guarantee that they will give you any instructions. If you're not landing at their airport, there is no requirement for a landing clearance.
 
Lindberg said:
Me: "Tower, Bugsmasher 123AB"
Tower: "3AB, Tower, go ahead"
Me: "3AB is 4 to the east at 2500 over flying the field for a landing on the river."
Tower: [silence]

I've established two-way comms and recieved no permission for anything. But I can enter the airspace and do what I said I was going to do (or something else).
Click to expand...

And if they say remain to the east of the XYZ, I’d wager for a few reasons you’d best remain east of XYZ, same if they don’t say you can land and you just land.
 
James331 said:
And if they say remain to the east of the XYZ, I’d wager for a few reasons you’d best remain east of XYZ, same if they don’t say you can land and you just land.
Click to expand...
I don't need them to say I can land if I'm not landing at their airport.
 
Lindberg said:
I don't need them to say I can land if I'm not landing at their airport.
Click to expand...

I know, my point was I wouldn’t go down the “tell them” road, and there are times a delta controller might give you instructions, just saying shy of a emergency I don’t see the need to try to come across as forceful.
 
Back towards the topic.....

The Snowbirds used to come through Gallup once a year to refuel. They always put on a mini show on arrival, coming in from all points of the compass to pass overhead trailing red, white, blue and green smoke.

And of course the 911 dispatch would get a call or two about a jet that is on fire landing at the airport....
 
Zeldman said:
I did that when I first moved into my current house. I still met the guys from the fire department...

I'll admit it was during winter. I had covered the small brush pile to keep it dry and I had waited until the snow was falling, but still someone panicked and called it in....
Click to expand...


Was that you?
 
midwestpa24 said:
https://fox2now.com/2019/02/18/pilo...louis-fire-chief-to-cease-landings-near-arch/

And now this. I guess props to the pilot for just helping avoid creating a scene, but not for the fire chief for restricting freedoms unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

Townie employee can’t restrict freedoms

thats-not-how-this-works.jpg
 
midwestpa24 said:
https://fox2now.com/2019/02/18/pilo...louis-fire-chief-to-cease-landings-near-arch/

And now this. I guess props to the pilot for just helping avoid creating a scene, but not for the fire chief for restricting freedoms unnecessarily.
Click to expand...
What an embarrassment. That fire chief just wants to throw his weight around. "It's my job to make sure things are safe and I'm not sure this is." You know, smoking isn't safe either, why don't you tell everyone they can't smoke even if it is legal. Maybe the public should call him every time they see someone smoking and tell him that the person is on fire.
 
So we can sum this up to two point:
1) The fire chief thinks he's God and bans legal water landings on the river.
2) The pilot is a ***** and agrees to not do what's perfectly legal.

I wonder how the fire chief could enforce #1 if #2 wasn't an issue. LOL
 
BigBadLou said:
So we can sum this up to two point:
1) The fire chief thinks he's God and bans legal water landings on the river.
2) The pilot is a ***** and agrees to not do what's perfectly legal.

I wonder how the fire chief could enforce #1 if #2 wasn't an issue. LOL
Click to expand...

Frankly if it was closer, sounds like a IDEAL destination for a seaplane flyin.

It’s the only way these clowns learn, just ignore their incoherent statist ramblings and carry on, much like how you deal with a small child having a tantrum.


As long as you’re good to enter the delta, IMO looks good aviation wise, and it’s sure a navigable waterway, so carry on and cry me a river, just keep your mouth shut, carry on and remember your GoPro and film their tantrums.

https://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/Missions/Navigation/Navigation-Charts/Upper-Mississippi-River/


A4-D7-AC13-54-B6-4641-A5-AE-063-AB8-E258-ED.jpg


0205-B472-43-F3-4-E25-AFA9-19-A497-FE61-EE.jpg
 
Last edited:
A5 pilots are starting to cause as much drama as Cirrus pilots.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
Cam Bender said:
So the issue isn’t that it’s unsafe or illegal, it’s that the public freaks out and his department doesn’t know how to react to it. I’d tell him to pack sand.
Click to expand...

Since the Mississippi is a border between MO and IL, tell em you're landing on the IL side.
 
Perhaps the sheriff thinks we have a government of men and not of laws.
 
Palmpilot said:
Perhaps the sheriff thinks we have a government of men and not of laws.
Click to expand...

Or make up their own "laws." I've experienced that while riding LEGALLY on my motorcycle, and friend of mine experienced the same thing when landing his Champ on public land/water (which was legal where he did). Certain people should not be allowed any sort of authority.
 
Reminds me of the Ryder cup incident.

Police chief Scott Knight, who looked like what you’d expect if junior from the sopranos dressed up as General Patton lol, got all respect muh authority on some seaplane pilots, think a lawsuit resulted.

31431135.sf.jpg



https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/floatplane-in-hot-water-at-ryder-cup-or-not.98533/

http://m.startribune.com/floatplane-pilot-lands-in-hot-water-at-ryder-cup/395585871/

“Dropped charges”
http://m.startribune.com/charges-dr...at-landed-on-lake-during-ryder-cup/403406556/
 
Last edited:
I'm just imagine an impromptu Seaplane Fly-In by the Arch the next weekend the weather is nice in STL. That Fire Chief doesn't know what he's started! :D
 
This is a bit blatant:

"Though Jenkerson still has concerns about the plane hitting water hazards like driftwood, he says he and Rief have reached an agreement: the water landings can continue away from Downtown St. Louis; north of the Chain of Rocks Bridge and south of the Jefferson Barracks Bridge."

North of the Chain of Rocks Bridge is covered by the Riverview Fire Department.
South of the Jefferson Barracks Bridge is covered by the Mehlville Fire Department.

In between those two bridges is covered by the St. Louis fire department, of whom Jenkerson is the chief...

So there is no "agreement" here. Jenkerson basically just chased the pilot out of his jurisdiction.
 
Unless it gets put on federal charts or put in a NOTAM, it won't stop other pilots from taking off or landing there. I wonder if they have gotten CPS tower to agree to instruct pilots not to do it?
 
Last edited:
And there really isn’t anything stopping Rief from landing there. I doubt if his agreement with the fire chief is legally binding or enforceable.

And I found the following line in the article to be rather sickening. “St. Louis Fire Chief Dennis Jenkerson says, legal or not, it has to stop.” Uh, no it doesn’t.

Power trip much?
 
Sounds like a good spot for an impromptu float flyin in the near future :p:D
 
Palmpilot said:
Unless it gets put on federal charts or put in a NOTAM, it won't stop other pilots from taking off or landing there. I wonder if they have gotten CPS tower to agree to instruct pilots not to do it?
Click to expand...
And what authority does the tower have to do that? Unless they tell you to keep clear of the D, which they can do, I don't know how they could effectively not let you land.
 
My engine is feeling a teensy bit rough....

Rawjawwwwwwwwww
 
Lindberg said:
And what authority does the tower have to do that? Unless they tell you to keep clear of the D, which they can do, I don't know how they could effectively not let you land.
Click to expand...
I don't know whether the controllers' manual would allow them to issue such an instruction, but once issued, 14 CFR 91.123(b) would obligate a pilot to obey it, except in an emergency.
 
Palmpilot said:
You only have to follow ATC instructions if ATC gives you instructions.
Click to expand...
AND if you accept them. The magic word is "unable". Granted, you should use good judgement before refusing the controller, but if your destination lies inside their airspace, they can't just tell you to take a hike.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top