Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by Bonchie, Apr 29, 2022.
I think you know the answer to that question.
speaking of confirmation bias
I would say that had it gone up the food chain and became a jury trial it would be the same. The verdict will affect the subjectivity of the lawyers summary. That's all. Anyway, speaking of jury trial, this could get there, but I doubt it. Administrative Law decisions can be appealed up into the _____ Law system. Whadda ya call that anyway? Where there are District Courts and stuff. The Real Law system? I did learn something if what Trent said is right. The first step in Appeal will be to an NTSB Administrative Law Judge. I always thought that if you Appeal it goes right on up to the, for lack of a better word, 'the show.'
I think SAFE has a good take on it.
Are you seriously putting Florida up as an example of santity?
Elected judges only supports bias vs the letter of the law, as the judges will have to play favorites in order to keep their jobs.
That needs to peel off a few layers and get down to the nitty gritty. All the way down to FAR 1.
Airport means an area of land or water that is used or intended to be used for the landing and takeoff of aircraft, and includes its buildings and facilities, if any.
He intended to land there and I'm pretty sure not leave the plane there and drive home. He intended to take off again if he had been able to land. It is therefore, an Airport.
I don't know if that lawyer really wants to compare his client to Nicolae Ceaușescu. That guy was just plain evil, and deserved to be shot.
You can't know if a lot of what you just said is actually true.
Yeah. But I believe him when he said he intended to land there. Pure speculation on my part that he intended to take off after that. Objection sustained on the hearsay and speculation.
Yo, @Bonchie , you weren't gonna leave the plane there were you?
In general, the certificate action appeal process starts at the informal level with FAA Legal at the FSDO. If an enforcement notice of action is issued (except emergency notice) then the appeal is taken to the NTSB ALJ. Next step would be appeal to the full NTSB board. Final appeal would be to the US Court of Appeals. But now you are talking some serious cash at this level.
Like when you believe posters here when they say they'll do a low pass and then just say they were setting up for a precautionary landing because they heard a sputter, but at the last minute all was right with the world again.
So you support a system where the outcome is determined entirely by who's doing the judging and not the facts, as long as the outcome is what you've determined the outcome should be, regardless of the facts.
I believe the posters here. It's against the Terms of POA to lie.
Don’t presume. I support a system more closely informed by a higher moral standard that also only judges *actual* crime, as defined by that standard, and attested to by 2-3 witnesses.
You wonder? I guarantee you they did not. They would've overthrown the United States government a long time ago!!!
I sent an email to my regional rep about what AOPA is doing, or rather not doing, lately that is really getting on my nerves. Got a wonderful forum letter telling me "they love everybody and are the best thing since pockets on a shirt for any pilot or wanna be pilot ... BTW your renewal is due."
I promply sent in a notification that I will not be renewing and I want no further contact from them whether it's a phone call, email, text, or something in the mail box. I was a member for a number of years but I can't see that they are worth the cost these days. If something ever changes (I'm not holding my breath) I may reconsider.
I don't hate the FAA. I haven't ever had an issue with them and have been treated quite fairly in any interaction with them. Of course I really try to play by the rules and not do anything to draw any attention to myself.
PS: Perhaps you should open a poll on who POA hates the most ...
I agree. You should be calling 9-1-1, because they're about to crash. There's no other reason someone would be 50 feet above your house on downwind. That's not a "practice engine out."
Clearly, you have no idea how much some of us hate tyrants.
If you are 50' over my house you are 30' below the tree line ...
I don’t know if it’s been said prior but right or wrong he does a great job of selling GA to the masses(edit: younger masses). Crucifying him,(right or wrong) gets rid of a ambassador to GA that is good at selling to younger generations.
I saw AOPA made a post about it/plug for their legal service plan on their Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cc_JLmXJMQ7/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
"AOPA is concerned about the case involving Trent Palmer, the FAA’s handling of it, and potential future implications for safety and backcountry flying.
We remain fully supportive of the rights of pilots to land on appropriate off-airport locations, or to execute a go-around at off-airport locations if conditions indicate a landing will not have a safe outcome. This applies to pilots of both fixed and rotary wing aircraft.
As a member of our Pilot Protection Services, Trent continues to receive legal support from an AOPA panel attorney."
I live on the edge of town, directly in line with final for RWY 28 (KDNA). My brother in law is a LEO. He called last month to see if I was flying (I wasn't) ... I asked him why ... he indicated multiple calls for "aircraft in distress" ... it turned out to be a crop duster
The CFIs in my area are pretty hard core ... I think the DPEs are as well.
Have you ever been on a jury? That's not how it works. If the defendant is on trial for dealing drugs, the jury is not composed of other dealers.
The DPE's want you to go down to 20 feet during simulated engine outs to an off airport site??? I'm having trouble getting my head wrapped around that?
I don't know about all of them as I have experience with the one that tested me ...
Do you know jury history? Obviously it might include other citizens in good standing as well, but the modern jury selection process often throws out people that actually should be on the jury.
That would be a hard no for me. I’d take a fail before doing that. Mostly because it’s not safe and there’s no good reason, but also because it’s against the regs.
It’s not safe? If you pick a good spot (like a grass runway that you spotted) it’s as safe as anything else…
I'm starting to think it's just AOPA. An organization setup for the right thing that lots it's way IMHO. I'm a member, seriously questioning renewal .
Well sure, if you’re practicing on top of a runway. But then why only 20 feet, and even more important, what does that have to do with this topic?
We were in Kentucky one time (like 2 weeks ago) when someone did a very low pass over the runway, er, well over a part of it anyways. We were going to call the authorities but then we realized it was a safety inspection so we were all OK with it. Encouraged it actually. For safety. We were all safer because of it.
I, for one, felt very safe. The poa commitment to safety is unassailable. In fact I saw one pilot, finding his view of the runway obstructed by the low mounted wings, skilfully maneuver so he could make an inspection. Clearly not liking what he saw, he proceeded home. That is the kind of airmanship (sorry....aviator-ship?) that is under assault in the palmer case.
As I recall, the safety inspection was absolutely above tree tops… so plenty of altitude.
A charted sod airport, even if it is private, is a bit different than an off airport site. If you decide to do a low pass and violate the FAR, it’s on you.
Does he though? Not picking on the guy, as he is but one of many of what I dub "hipster aviation" peddlers. I'm just not sure what showcasing the STOL/bAcKcOuNtRy version of an Icon A5, lifestyle branding exercise, does for the "masses" that cannot afford current housing rental prices as it is. The majority of whom received an inflation adjusted paycut this year. Hell, I'm an above median income earner, and my "raise" was a 5% paycut after inflation.
My point being, how relatable is clowning around off-pavement, sometimes gratuitously wrecking kites worth more than the median SFH in the Country? It's one thing for people to do that in junker modded bumper cars on the weekend at the local drag/dirt strip for less than a couple grand in parts and labor, it's another to do that in half a million dollar flying jet ski.
If it is indeed the intent to invite young eyes to the avocation, then that avenue is at the very least, incredibly tone deaf on the socioeconomics (reason I don't do young eagles anymore). Thing is, I don't think there's any legitimate advocacy being intended here. This is just another flat-billed Tech Bro humblebragging on youtube, so the argument is moot.
At the macro level, little of what is being peddled on social media by hipster aviation is actually helping our insurance rates going forward, which is about the only "social" aspect about this hobby I care about anymore. We got enough externalities to go around (looking at you, murderous ERAU) as it is, we don't need the help.
I'll agree with a lot of your points, but I do give palmer some credit. He flies a kitfox, and while it's probably the nicest kitfox in the world, it's a far cry from an icon. He has also made several videos highlighting the costs involved in aviation, and how to minimize them through mogas burning EAB's. He ought to be right up your alley other than the flat brim hat.
There are plenty of backcountry haters in the broader aviation community, the response of many in this thread was quite predictable. They're no different than the anti second amendment gun fudds who believe the only type of legal gun should be a single shot 12 gauge and think all semi-automatics should be confiscated. Maybe the only type of airplane that should be legal is an A320 with the autopilot engaged at 200 feet and an autoland from an ILS done every time? Works great for China! OK OK, the political elites can still have their gulfstreams.
I don't do aerobatics or fly warbirds, but I heartily embrace a pilot's right to to that flying, even if it's not as statistically safe as an A320 on autopilot for 99.99999% of every flight. I'm sure aerobatic aircraft and noisy warbirds might even offend a few grandmas and Karens on the ground near the airports they're based out of.
If you think there has to be "more to the story" for the FAA to do this to Trent Palmer, well, you've had a very different experience than I with this agency over the last 20+ years. The only "more to the story" is probably that they were out to get him since they violated him on 91.13 for waterskiing a few years back. Who has this pilot injured or put at risk?
Now if the FAA had suspended his ticket for the flat brim hat, I think that’s something we could all support.
Was it water-skiing? I thought he got a talking-to for something having to do with flying a drone or RC plane next to his plane? Both?
He got violated about 4 years go for water skiing in his kitfox with a passenger on lake Tahoe. FAA violated him on 91.13 careless/reckless (because he had a passenger) and 91.119(a), alleging that he somehow would've caused undue hazard to persons or property on the ground if his power unit failed. I'm not really sure I understand how 91.119(a) applied in that case, but that's what they got him on. 12m 20s in is where he talks about it.