Might be a short career

Does Tennessee prohibit landing on roads?

I dont know that the FAA cares as long as you do it safely... After all there’s nothing in the regs that say you HAVE to land at an airport; just ask any seaplane or bush pilot...

I know at least Alaska and Montana explicitly allow use of roadways for aviaition activities. I dont know if any other state explicitly permits or prohibits it though I imagine some might, afterall NJ prohibits water takeoffs/landings on any NJ waterway (including coastal waters) not designated a seaplane base

EDIT: Reading the article, sounds like the guy admitted to flying to the school and not having a place to land so decoded the highway was the next best option... FAA will lilely cite him for a 91.103 violation and since they have him on 1, add a 91.13 reckless operation violation in there... also sounds like the guy was there to present as a CFI; seems the next job fair he visits will likely be as an applicant
 
Last edited:
apr911 said:
EDIT: Reading the article, sounds like the guy admitted to flying to the school and not having a place to land so decoded the highway was the next best option... FAA will lilely cite him for a 91.103 violation and since they have him on 1, add a 91.13 reckless operation violation in there... also sounds like the guy was there to present as a CFI; seems the next job fair he visits will likely be as an applicant
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it’s a 91.103 violation...maybe the site he was planning on was being used as an impromptu parking lot.
 
91.13 is kinda the trump card they can play.
 
Yad think a CFI would know a bit better that this might end poorly.
 
Last edited:
That'll cover a few career paths. Aviation, law enforcement, psychology
 
Last edited:
I suspect the news story angle is a bit different than the truth. That's a Zenith, he could have landed in the grass in front of the school. With due care, I'm sure that he'll be fine... Or the FAA might violate him and put him on probation for a couple years if he admits it wasn't the smartest thing to do...
 
The video shows a lot of traffic on the highway for a non-emergency landing.
 
Unless he had permission from local LE, that was incredibly stupid.
 
A lot of traffic when he was taxiing. The A/C is a Zenith 750 and has really good STOL capabilities. A variant of this is consistently winning short field landing competitions. He needed very little road to land.

If there were no cars around at landing, was it dangerous? The taxi on the street is questionable as his vehicle isn’t road worthy. But mostly, the optics on this are just really, really bad.

So, what rules could he have broken? What is the maximum penalty for them?
 
Hmmm...there is a field that is nearly 2000’ long a block from the school and multiple sports fields. The STOL has a ground roll of 100 ft, the Cruizer is 350. There should have been plenty of places to land. Instead, he lands on a highway, then taxis several blocks to the school?

No, not a smart things to do. The administrative rules might save him, but this was stupid.
 
I could understand a kid who just got his license doing this, but a CFI? He should have his ticket pulled. That's just ridiculous.
 
Wonder if he had anyone in the cockpit to hold his beer...
 
Kritchlow said:
“He then realized there was no place to land near the school”..????

When he took off he didn’t know where he was going to land??
Click to expand...

That was my first thought which is why I said a 91.103 violation was likely but then @MauleSkinner pointed out:

MauleSkinner said:
I’m not sure it’s a 91.103 violation...maybe the site he was planning on was being used as an impromptu parking lot.
Click to expand...

Of course @bflynn has apparently looked up the site and found quite a few other fields to possibly use...

bflynn said:
Hmmm...there is a field that is nearly 2000’ long a block from the school and multiple sports fields. The STOL has a ground roll of 100 ft, the Cruizer is 350. There should have been plenty of places to land. Instead, he lands on a highway, then taxis several blocks to the school?

No, not a smart things to do. The administrative rules might save him, but this was stupid.
Click to expand...

Still maybe those fields were in use (it is getting into spring so the sports fields might have been unexpectedly occupied) or were otherwise made unfit for landing for other reasons. Might be a bit of a stretch of 91.103 but I suppose the FAA would still argue that he did not “become familiar with all available information” by not confirming the availability/suitability of the fields for landing and would nab him for 91.13 in that case for not returning to origin or another suitable alternate.

Also possible, the news story is projecting/spinning or otherwise misunderstanding what actually happened/why. The part about not having a place to land reads like a quote but is not a direct quote from the Pilot....

Maybe he intended to land on the highway all along... though that seems kinda stupid given the other options/possibilities highlighted by @bflynn so chances are a 91.13 violation would still be in the works in that case.

I’m sure a 91.13 violation is still possible/likely and proving he wasn’t careless/reckless landing off-field in a non-emergency situation in a populated area is going to be difficult but then the regs are sufficiently vague enough about what constitutes a populated area (and have exceptions explicitly for takeoff and landing anyway) that he might get away with it, especially without another stronger/supporting violation (e.g. 91.103) Again the FAA is more concerned with what you do in the air and is less concerned with what happens on the ground or water, especially when not at an airport... that’s usually the purview/jurisdiction of the local government. If he taxied and took off from the highway, I doubt the FAA would even get involved since the flight orginated from the highway but since he landed they have to at least investigate his decision making process that led to him landing and ending his flight there.
 
Last edited:
Kritchlow said:
“He then realized there was no place to land near the school”..????

When he took off he didn’t know where he was going to land??
Click to expand...
Trivial detail. He's only a flight instructor.
 
So considering the type of aircraft, who wants to delve into 91.319 and the aircraft’s operating limitations?
 
mryan75 said:
Trivial detail. He's only a flight instructor.
Click to expand...

Good point. Too bad he isn’t a landing instructor. I think he should be tickled in the public square til he pees his pants, then has to fly home with same pants on. The nerve of some people in this country, the land of the free, home of the brave, taxiway of the off-airport crowd. I believe he should be strung to 4 angry steeds and they should all pull on his limbs until he comes from together. This guy is a real joker.
 
To Do List:
Put placard on dash:
"WHAT WHERE YOU THINKING!".
And:
"HOW WILL THIS LOOK ON THE ACCIDENT REPORT!".
 
If you think Tennessee pilots are bad, y'all should see them try to drive cars. Ain't pretty.
 
Bill Jennings said:
If you think Tennessee pilots are bad, y'all should see them try to drive cars. Ain't pretty.
Click to expand...

I lived in Memphis for two years and yes they are pretty bad but they are not nearly as bad as those here in NC, especially around Charlotte.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top