AOPA Never Again

He seems to be doing a whole lot of finger pointing considering that he wound up with a 30-day rip for something that could have resulted in a criminal conviction. The fact of the matter is that he violated the TFR, and he did it because he didn't properly chart it. All the whining about it starting on the wrong line and it not showing up in ADS-B is really irrelevant, and IMO shows an unwillingness to take responsibility as PIC.

But the guy didn't even get punished for violating the TFR. He got punished for not adequately informing himself of all information concerning his flight. And the issue is not that he informed himself from an unofficial source. The issue is that 1) there's no evidence other than his self-serving testimony that he informed himself at all, and 2) the circumstantial evidence suggests that he didn't. Remember, there's no dispute that he violated the TFR, and he didn't get busted for that. So it seems to me the FAA did him a favor by saying, "We believe you violated the TFR inadvertently because of inadequate preflight preparation. So we will bust you only for the inadequate preflight preparation."

As for ASRS, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that his ASRS report doesn't say that this happened as a result of failing to get an adequate brief, in which case he has no get-out-of-jail-free card for that.

But the bottom line is that if this happened to you, and the FAA wasn't going to just let it go, this seems like exactly the kind of deal you'd want to get.
 
comanchepilot said:
This quote tracks quite nicely with the two most important truisms in the bureaucratic world - if it is not written down it did not happen and, if you cannot prove it happened, then it did not.
Click to expand...
The guy is supposedly a former AF fighter pilot. He must be well versed in such rules.
 
acrophile said:
For almost 14 years now, monitoring 121.5, if able, has been required by FDC 4/4386, which you should see on every briefing you get.
Click to expand...

I virtually always do.

Just Saturday I heard an ELT over Lake Blue Ridge and reported it to Macon FSS. They advised it was the first report of it. I only have one radio and it goes to 121.5 any time I'm not on another frequency.

Could possibly even save somebody's life someday.

Plus in the event of another 9/11 style attack, I'd like to know right away.
 
Last edited:
denverpilot said:
I noticed one of the Foreflight upgrades removed my DUATS login information recently from one of the iPads. It was in there... Now it's not. Something to watch out for, I guess.
Click to expand...

IIRC ForeFlight is moving away from DUATS and more toward the LMFS formats. That may have something to do with it.
 
acrophile said:
For almost 14 years now, monitoring 121.5, if able, has been required by FDC 4/4386, which you should see on every briefing you get.
Click to expand...

Which is a blatant abuse of the NOTAM utility. The requirement is directly regulatory in nature, and not of a 'notice' type.
 
Henning said:
Let's not forget the minor fact that even if he had logged in with his identity established, he still didn't disseminate the information correctly or completely and still would have busted the TFR.

The reason he got violated and suspended though was not for his errors, I know first hand that the FAA is quite tolerant of errors; he was suspended for his attitude. The FAA is very leery of people who display "hazardous attitudes", because they are the ones who will most likely repeat their errors. Show them that you understand your error and own it, rather than trying to shift the blame, and they are happy with the knowledge that you are not likely to repeat that error.

When the FAA inspector climbed in my 310 he laughed because the gear switch was still in the up position, "First time I've seen that."
Click to expand...

My experience aligns with yours - most FAA professionals want to do the job right, and prefer to fix the problem, and not necessarily the blame. Especially on more minor issues, or ones that didn't put others at risk. I could spend a day writing thank -you notes to controllers, versus one minute for writing criticisms of their service. Same-same for FSS folks. Overwhelmingly positive support. .

And I wouldn't have an issue with a "hazardous attitude" bringing wrath down upon the violator.

But I do have an issue with an arrogant, poorly supervised, marginally competent, bureaucratic buffoon, with little to no external accountability, dragging a pilot through expensive hoops, just because he can.

It happens enough that a better oversight and appeal process needs to be generated. There's a big difference between explaining how you screwed up, versus trying to shift the blame. I know this this case may be more black-and-white, in that he made a error that generated an intercept. But, a 'la Hoover ("we have to get this guy!"), this is a bully bureaucracy that needs much better checks and balances.

I'd think a professional attitude on the FAA's part would be to judge the facts, and not get your knickers in a bunch if the guy brings a lawyer - read a law/rule or two - he's entitled.

Might be a good research project to see how the FAA rules on similar violations, depending on the accused having (or not having) an attorney in the loop. Then start looking at kicking them around a bit on the results, maybe adding some more teeth to the pilot's bill of rights.
 
Turningfinal said:
Any time there's a chance for a TFR or airspace restriction around the Chicagoland area I always call for a briefing. I do it on the drive to the airport, so there's no additional time taken out of my day.

Unfortunately many pilots are of the stubborn variety. They'll never learn.
Click to expand...

Me too. It's super easy to file a flight plan even for a 10 minute flight with Foreflight. Do it. Then call from your car. They even know who's calling now and typically they will say, "Is this Bob in NXXXCD and is this your VFR flight plan to KXYZ?. I say, "Yes, and I just need an abbreviated briefing with TFR's on route, adverse weather only and new NOTAMs." If there were TFR's AIR / SIGMETS and NOTAMS on Foreflight, I mention those and just ask if there's anything new. Shows I did my homework, and makes best use of their (and my) time.

I NEVER open a Flight Plan, as I'm afraid I'll forget to close it. Plus, in LA, I'm with ATC the entire flight.

Foreflight---->On-line File---->Abbreviated Briefing in Car----Fly!

Added bonus: Always makes passengers feel more comfortable when they hear you get a safety briefing.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
What does it matter if it stored the briefing? :dunno: He failed to evaluate it correctly then went on to blame everyone and everything besides himself. In the end the issue was not the error, rather the attitude, that busted him.
Click to expand...


That's the assumption. But if true, and he's a nut, why did AOPA give him their soapbox to stand on?

Someone believe his story in the editorial department... Or he's really good friends with a Yodice. Haha.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Me too. It's super easy to file a flight plan even for a 10 minute flight with Foreflight. Do it. Then call from your car. They even know who's calling now and typically they will say, "Is this Bob in NXXXCD and is this your VFR flight plan to KXYZ?. I say, "Yes, and I just need an abbreviated briefing with TFR's on route, adverse weather only and new NOTAMs." If there were TFR's AIR / SIGMETS and NOTAMS on Foreflight, I mention those and just ask if there's anything new. Shows I did my homework, and makes best use of their (and my) time.

I NEVER open a Flight Plan, as I'm afraid I'll forget to close it. Plus, in LA, I'm with ATC the entire flight.

Foreflight---->On-line File---->Abbreviated Briefing in Car----Fly!

Added bonus: Always makes passengers feel more comfortable when they hear you get a safety briefing.
Click to expand...
You can use ForeFlight to brief without filing the flight plan. I'm pretty sure it's not filing the plan that makes it provable, it's the briefing source. If you provide a DUATS account FF will use it, otherwise it will brief via LockMart.
 
I misunderstood the meaning of the title !!!
 
Henning said:
Interesting. It also supports my position of calling for my brief and talking to a human who is better at decoding crap than I am. It sounds like he ****ed someone off in this process.
Click to expand...

I am in the briefer camp too. I do all my planning electronically and give the briefer a call before I depart just to CMA and make sure nothing has changed. Cheap insurance.
 
docmirror said:
Which is a blatant abuse of the NOTAM utility. The requirement is directly regulatory in nature, and not of a 'notice' type.
Click to expand...

All NOTAMs have regulatory force. And FDC 4/4386 was certainly a plausible NOTAM when it was first issued. I agree though that a NOTAM should not become permanent, but rather should be replaced by a regulation.

Still, there's no excuse for pilots to be unaware of the NOTAMed requirement.
 
Scrabo said:
I misunderstood the meaning of the title !!!
Click to expand...

Me too.

I just got my 12th (literally) "this is your last chance to give us money!!" AOPA email yesterday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top