Revoked license.

"I had a medical appointment, and had to fly to it".

Perhaps his driving license had been revoked for some valid reason, so he could not drive? And the CFI's found about it?

There is a lot missing here, as others have said.
 
geezer said:
"I had a medical appointment, and had to fly to it".

Perhaps his driving license had been revoked for some valid reason, so he could not drive? And the CFI's found about it?

There is a lot missing here, as others have said.
Click to expand...
Unless the AME was on the airport I don't think that makes sense.

But it was funny to read when he posted it.
 
Half Fast said:
????

I must not get your meaning.

All the D towers around here use CTAF. The frequency is tower frequency during tower operating hours and it becomes CTAF when the tower is closed.
Click to expand...
It about the direction of the change.

At many towered fields, the tower frequency becomes the CTAF when the tower is closed. But this scenario is about a nontowered airport that grows a tower. It may exist but I’d expect it to be very unusual for a new tower to acquire the previous CTAF frequency. One that isn’t going to be the same one used by 15 nontowered airports with line of sight. I’m just trying to imagine the communications havoc if that wasn’t the case.
 
geezer said:
"I had a medical appointment, and had to fly to it".

Perhaps his driving license had been revoked for some valid reason, so he could not drive? And the CFI's found about it?
.
Click to expand...
It's not that crazy for someone with multiple homes, who flies between them. My AME, for example, is in Houston where my company HQ is, but my family farm/home is in Wisconsin.
 
StraightnLevel said:
It's not that crazy for someone with multiple homes, who flies between them. My AME, for example, is in Houston where my company HQ is, but my family farm/home is in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...
yes it is crazy, and illegal, and stupid for someone to schedule His life such that he “has to” conduct operations requiring a valid medical without having one.
 
I'm sure a sizeable portion of pilots here have made a flight after (gasp!) not checking NOTAMS, and some have flown after forgetting to renew their medical. Illegal, yes. Stupid or at least careless, maybe, but 23 year olds do stupid things (I know I did!). "Crazy" is a stretch.

As for AMEs on the airport, our local AME had his office in the walled off back of his T-hangar, behind his Bonanza. He had retired from general practice but kept doing medicals (and flying!) into his 90s.
 
MauleSkinner said:
yes it is crazy, and illegal, and stupid for someone to schedule His life such that he “has to” conduct operations requiring a valid medical without having one.
Click to expand...
At that point you suck it up and get on the aluminum tube
 
Pugs said:
At that point you suck it up and get on the aluminum tube
Click to expand...
Yup, or drive. My HIMS AME is a 2hr flight or a 5.5hr drive. If my medical was expired I sure as hell would be at 0’AGL heading east on I-10 for an appointment.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I dunno. Yeah, I hear how it comes across. But like we say, there are two sides to the story. Why assume his story is the wrong one? Assume his story is the real one: Certificate revoked. Comes to a flight school Discloses fully what happened. They take him in, charge him money, train him to checkride readiness. Then, they say, "oh, never mind. We've decided to never sign off on your checkride."

What would your attitude be at this point?
Click to expand...
Possible. But from his posts here my guess would be they heard his story, offered their services, then he started acting like, well, himself, and they decided they weren’t going out on a limb for this guy.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Keep in mind that the OP‘s revocation and the tower revocation mentioned are two different events.

But a control tower will always be a different frequency than a CTAF Or Unicom.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t they also announce this on the weather? It would become an atc tower, but it would be in the same weather frequency as pre-tower: “ … winds 220 @ 5, altimeter 3005 runway 23 in use; notam: NCD airport now tower controlled on 119.8 ; advise on initial contact you have uniform”
 
Dana said:
I'm sure a sizeable portion of pilots here have made a flight after (gasp!) not checking NOTAMS, and some have flown after forgetting to renew their medical. Illegal, yes. Stupid or at least careless, maybe, but 23 year olds do stupid things (I know I did!). "Crazy" is a stretch.

As for AMEs on the airport, our local AME had his office in the walled off back of his T-hangar, behind his Bonanza. He had retired from general practice but kept doing medicals (and flying!) into his 90s.
Click to expand...
Assuming you’re still talking about revocations, You don’t get revoked for forgetting to renew your medical. You get revoked for knowingly flying illegally, probably multiple times, having been advised that you need to renew your medical if you’re going to fly.
 
Last edited:
The OP intentionally flew when he didn't have a current medical and intentionally failed to perform adequate preflight planning (did not check NOTAMs and the Chart Supplement/AFD). The FAA views intentionally breaking the rules to be worse than making a mistake.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Keep in mind that the OP‘s revocation and the tower revocation mentioned are two different events.
Click to expand...
I didn't get that. I have no idea what a "tower revocation" is but, aside from that, the single most likely scenario for the event described by the OP is, he was given a Brasher for busting the Delta. During the investigation, the ASI discovered his medical was expired at the time.

I say likely because discovering something like that - expired medical; lack of currency; even "grey charter" - during the course of investigating an in-flight pilot deviation is very common.
 
kkoran said:
The OP intentionally flew when he didn't have a current medical and intentionally failed to perform adequate preflight planning (did not check NOTAMs and the Chart Supplement/AFD). The FAA views intentionally breaking the rules to be worse than making a mistake.
Click to expand...
Still not typical for a revocation without other factors, especially in the past decade.
 
Justin M said:
Wouldn’t they also announce this on the weather? It would become an atc tower, but it would be in the same weather frequency as pre-tower: “ … winds 220 @ 5, altimeter 3005 runway 23 in use; notam: NCD airport now tower controlled on 119.8 ; advise on initial contact you have uniform”
Click to expand...
Not all weather reporting systems have the ability to add comments. Where I work, we cannot put any announcements on our ASOS. But a nearby airport with AWOS does have that ability.
 
Lindberg said:
Lack of compliance attitude.
Click to expand...
More than that. Lack of a compliant attitude means you don't get a pass with just counseling or training. It does not elevate a suspendable violation into a revocation. Flying with an medical that had been expired less than three months and failure to establish 2-way communications in Class D are each low-severity violations without some aggravating factors. We're talking a presumptive range of a 30-90 day suspension. With aggravating factors, maybe bumped to the 90-150 or 120-180 presumptive ranges. But still in the world of suspensions.

Although there are a few others, like refusing or failing a 709 ride, revocation is mainly reserved for what the FAA considers really serious violations. Fraudulent conduct (Martha Lunken was hit with a revocation for - the FAA said - turning off her ADS-B to try to avoid detection). Drug and alcohol violations. Exercising pilot privileges while one's pilot certificate is already suspended. Flying with a known disqualifying medical condition while your medical certificate is deferred or denied. Student pilots who fly with passengers. Stuff like that.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Although there are a few others, like refusing or failing a 709 ride, revocation is mainly reserved for what the FAA considers really serious violations.
Click to expand...
and even at that, I’ve seen one pilot certificate where the result of a failed 709 ride was a Limitation to the effect of “Not valid for PIC in conventional gear aircraft.”
 
Ed Haywood said:
I would bet that clueless arrival is a near-daily occurrence for several months after establishment in such a scenario.
Click to expand...


Now, you can have a little fun doing it the other way around....

When flying into a non-towered airport with a buddy in the right seat, make a tower call. Then have your buddy respond as the tower. "Podunk tower, Bugsmasher 123A on final for 27." "123A, cleared to land, runway 27." "Roger, tower. 123A cleared for 27."

Messes with everybody on frequency. "Huh?! When did this place get a tower?"

:devil:
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
Not all weather reporting systems have the ability to add comments. Where I work, we cannot put any announcements on our ASOS. But a nearby airport with AWOS does have that ability.
Click to expand...
Do you work at a control tower without an ATIS?
 
MauleSkinner said:
yes it is crazy, and illegal, and stupid for someone to schedule His life such that he “has to” conduct operations requiring a valid medical without having one.
Click to expand...
Not defending flying without a medical; just pointing out that many of us with multiple residences may have a distant AME.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Not defending flying without a medical; just pointing out that many of us with multiple residences may have a distant AME.
Click to expand...
Which just means that you have to have alternate arrangements for arriving if that is the case, or be willing to reschedule your appointment until you can arrange such transportation. An AME appointment is not a life or death situation.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Not defending flying without a medical; just pointing out that many of us with multiple residences may have a distant AME.
Click to expand...
So why mention it?

Kinda like saying "no offence" in some context. No offence, but you are actually defending it a bit. :)
 
Half Fast said:
There's a difference between explaining and defending. I think @StraightnLevel was offering an explanation, not a defense.
Click to expand...

Then it is just wasted electrons isn't it? For all we know could be fear of the color of the only commercial flight he can take instead of flying himself. Or any other explanation but adds nothing to the discussion.
 
SebIp said:
Then it is just wasted electrons isn't it? For all we know could be fear of the color of the only commercial flight he can take instead of flying himself. Or any other explanation but adds nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...
Maybe it was a 737 MAX 9. ;)
 
SebIp said:
Then it is just wasted electrons isn't it? For all we know could be fear of the color of the only commercial flight he can take instead of flying himself. Or any other explanation but adds nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...
It’s ok. There are plenty of electrons out there.
 
MauleSkinner said:
No, Tower doesn’t use a CTAF frequency (122.8, 122.7, etc.) CTAF uses the tower frequency.

If a tower is put in at a previously CTAF airport, the frequency will change.
Click to expand...
It has happened about a decade ago in SoCal. I forget the actual airport, but it had become a Class D, however the chart printed with Class E, CTAF, and Tower frequencies. The A/FD published with the correction so there was no NOTAM, until ATC realized what’s up after about the third day of Brasher Warnings. Then Tower began monitoring the published CTAF and advising pilots of the active ATCT. About a week later the FAA published a NOTAM as FSDO didn’t want to process a ton of violations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top