Commercial tour operator turning off ADS-B

MonkeyClaw said:
BTW - I don't know why people think it isn't any of my business? .
Click to expand...
Well, there’s the problem.

Because it isn’t. The behavior has no direct or material impact to you.

Do you report to police the license plate numbers of cars that you observe going over the speed limit? Not coming to a full and complete stop at stop signs?

I live in the country, happily, where people mind to their own business.
 
MonkeyClaw said:
I may have missed it. Is there some sort of form that needs to be filled out? I'm sure the airport manager knows, so I'll have a discussion with him. As can be seen from some of the early responses, not everyone is aware of the ADS-B requirements.

BTW - I don't know why people think it isn't any of my business? I don't like the ADS-B rules either, but that doesn't make them go away. Due to ongoing litigation, I can't say much more (this is the kind of guy who would file a slander suit at the drop of a hat, even when the facts are out there). I'm not just trying to report some rando though.
Click to expand...

Is the guy who would file that slander suit kinda like that guy who would rat pilots out to the feds for rules he doesn’t even know if they really are breaking?
 
Rumor is? administrative action? Ongoing litigation?
Sounds to me like a bunch of crap. Do you have ANY facts? Do you KNOW for a fact the airplane is ADS-B equipped? Do you KNOW for a fact that the ADS-B is being turned off? Intentionally?

It's none of your business, if someone wants to violate the rules, that's on them. Or perhaps they aren't violating rules and you (someone) just wants to be a Richard Cranium?

I had non-functioning ads-b for several months last year. I got certified letters from the FAA, I got emails, I got drop dead notices and spoke on the phone at length. IF someone is turning off ads-b or it has issues and is intermittent, the FAA will most likely find it on their own. I know of others that have had communications of the not so friendly kind from the FAA when they forgot to turn on their ADS-B, or when the avionics shop removed the safety wire holding the nav light switch in the on position.

If I see something really stupid, as in dangerous for the pilot of people I the ground, I say something to the pilot.
 
WDD said:
That’s what Martha said……..
Click to expand...

Um nope, she never said anything like that. She claimed it had been acting up and that it just happened to do so when she decided to fly under the bridge but she never wrote it up or tagged it as inoperative. The FAA (whether right or wrong, not gonna get into that) believed she was not telling the truth and that's why the revocation, not because of the ADS-B or even the bridge. Just like if you make a false statement on your medical or any other official FAA form, what do you think is going to happen to you?

If your ADS-B or transponder is broken just log it and tag it. So long as you are not flying in airspace where it is required you're fine.
 
MonkeyClaw said:
I may have missed it. Is there some sort of form that needs to be filled out? I'm sure the airport manager knows, so I'll have a discussion with him. As can be seen from some of the early responses, not everyone is aware of the ADS-B requirements.

BTW - I don't know why people think it isn't any of my business? I don't like the ADS-B rules either, but that doesn't make them go away. Due to ongoing litigation, I can't say much more (this is the kind of guy who would file a slander suit at the drop of a hat, even when the facts are out there). I'm not just trying to report some rando though.
Click to expand...

So do you report anyone that breaks a rule? Do you report the guy going 70 mph in a 55 mph zone? Seems you have an issue with the one operator, and trying to seek out validation.
 
MonkeyClaw said:
What (if anything) can be done about this? If they are reported to the FAA, will anything happen how would you even report them?
Click to expand...

One can "turn off" the ability to be tracked via various "aware" sites. Can't to anything about that because it's not illegal.
 
martym said:
One can "turn off" the ability to be tracked via various "aware" sites. Can't to anything about that because it's not illegal.
Click to expand...

But not all of them.

adsbexchange will never block any tail numbers.
 
This arrived in my email this morning:

From: DanStrange <DanStrange@protonmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 9:01:29 AM
Subject: Disgruntled local pilot

Good morning,

I saw this on a message board today and though the local operators should be made aware, this individual is looking to report people and small business to the FAA for infractions he admits he doesn’t even know they are committing.

Blue skies.
Dan​

With an screenshot of the post.

Talk about spreading rumors! I'm curious HOW one would report this. I didn't say I was going to do it, or that I was going to do it without proof. The issue (as was pointed out by someone who wasn't jumping to random conclusions) is that this one particular operator (from another airport) is making our airport look bad and causing complaints. Airport management can't track him if he is illegally turning off his ADS-B. IF he is turning off his ADS-B so he can't be tracked, it is against the regs. This hurts all of the local businesses and other users of our airport. So despite what is said above, the idea is to help our airport an local businesses.

If you don't know the history, it's probably best to either answer the question or move on. There are plenty of people to pick fights with on the internet.
 
Funny, 55 replies and no answers. Looks like the method would be the same as other FAA complaints via an AIR21.
 
Coward tries to 'out me' to local operators (most of whom I know and agree that this person is bad for the airport), then deletes his email after the people he contacted tell him they agree with me :rolleyes: :p. I guess that's life as a troll.
upload_2022-6-17_11-7-47.png
 
MonkeyClaw said:
Coward tries to 'out me' to local operators (most of whom I know and agree that this person is bad for the airport), then deletes his email after the people he contacted tell him they agree with me :rolleyes: :p. I guess that's life as a troll.
View attachment 107866
Click to expand...

I think the point here is that you are the troll!
 
OP let it go.

Worry about yourself, and let others live their own life.

The plane isn't even at the same airport as you.

Go fly around, enjoy the views, and let other pilots do the same.

Besides, it could backfire on you, and in the end you make enemies, and also get investigated.


I'll tell you a short story.
A good friend of mine lives on a nice dead end country road, everyone has an acreage, and there are only 12 houses on the entire road, 6 on each side.
This was a great road to live on, and for many years everyone got along well. Well 1 place went up for sale, and a woman bought it, she was warmly welcomed to the neighborhood, and they all went on about their lives as they had for years. Soon police cars were seen driving the road regularly , and a cop car had never been seen on that road before. Hmmm then police were stopping at houses and talking about the reports made, and telling people that they better stop breaking laws, or else. It wasn't hard to figure out who was calling the cops, and suddenly her neighbors were not friendly to her, and she wondered why. Her driveway was no longer plowed after a snowstorm by the nice retired man who did all 12 driveways on the road, and the road itself with his huge blower on a tractor. She asked someone to watch her dog and place when going on vacation and was told NO. A guy got tired of her dog in his yard crapping on his lawn and reported the dog regularly, and finally he had enough and shot the dog. The road had an annual bbq get together and she wasn't invited, and she wanted to be. Her car needed a jump start one day, and Nobody would help her. The street was now 11 houses of friends, and 1 enemy. All she had to do was be nice, and mind her own business. Instead she ruffled feathers and ****ed off the neighbors .

Don't be that person!
 
There’s a fine line between a concerned citizen and a RAT.

Looks like he called you out as a RAT.

perhaps I’m not reading everything correctly. Would not be the first time. But, if I am reading correctly…

I think you are a RAT.
 
geneseib said:
Mind your own business. No more dangerous than the first 100 years of aviation when ADS-B didn't exist and pilots actually looked out their windows.
Click to expand...

No more dangerous........and definitely not any safer, either. I've got a good buddy who is dead and probably wouldn't be had both aircraft involved had ADS-B. The NTSB said that from the angles they converged there was no way they would have ever seen each other.

I'm not sure why all the luddites on this forum are so anti ADSB. Do you turn off your headlights at night just because the horse and buggy didn't have one, therefore you don't need them either?

With all that being said, I wouldn't report said tour guy. Maybe go have a chat with him, explain your position and why you think it's a safety concern. Even if you do report him, the FAA is too short staffed to do anything about it.
 
MonkeyClaw said:
Coward tries to 'out me' to local operators (most of whom I know and agree that this person is bad for the airport), then deletes his email after the people he contacted tell him they agree with me :rolleyes: :p. I guess that's life as a troll.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should try life as something else.
 
Silvaire said:
An inop ADS-B does not make the aircraft unairworthy. Just log it as inoperative and tag it as Do Not Use.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?

(f) Except as prohibited in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, each person operating an aircraft equipped with ADS-B Out must operate this equipment in the transmit mode at all times unless -

(1) Otherwise authorized by the FAA when the aircraft is performing a sensitive government mission for national defense, homeland security, intelligence or law enforcement purposes and transmitting would compromise the operations security of the mission or pose a safety risk to the aircraft, crew, or people and property in the air or on the ground; or

(2) Otherwise directed by ATC when transmitting would jeopardize the safe execution of air traffic control functions.
Click to expand...
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
14 CFR 91.225(f)
Except as prohibited in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, each person operating an aircraft equipped with ADS-B Out must operate this equipment in the transmit mode at all times unless -

(1) Otherwise authorized by the FAA when the aircraft is performing a sensitive government mission for national defense, homeland security, intelligence or law enforcement purposes and transmitting would compromise the operations security of the mission or pose a safety risk to the aircraft, crew, or people and property in the air or on the ground; or

(2) Otherwise directed by ATC when transmitting would jeopardize the safe execution of air traffic control functions.
Click to expand...

But that’s when it’s required to be on, if not required to be on you should be able to turn it off, otherwise it would be called out with tomato flames requirements.
 
Whitney said:
When looking at the minimum equipment list, it's not on there.
Click to expand...
Here’s the excerpt from my MMEL…
52-02 Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
(ADS-B) System
May be inoperative provided it is not required by 14 CFR.
NOTE: If ADS-B is installed in lieu of or as a replacement for 14 CFR required equipment, the repair category in the operator’s MEL will be the same as that of the 14 CFR required equipment.
 
Whitney said:
OP let it go.

Worry about yourself, and let others live their own life.

The plane isn't even at the same airport as you.

Go fly around, enjoy the views, and let other pilots do the same.

Besides, it could backfire on you, and in the end you make enemies, and also get investigated.


I'll tell you a short story.
A good friend of mine lives on a nice dead end country road, everyone has an acreage, and there are only 12 houses on the entire road, 6 on each side.
This was a great road to live on, and for many years everyone got along well. Well 1 place went up for sale, and a woman bought it, she was warmly welcomed to the neighborhood, and they all went on about their lives as they had for years. Soon police cars were seen driving the road regularly , and a cop car had never been seen on that road before. Hmmm then police were stopping at houses and talking about the reports made, and telling people that they better stop breaking laws, or else. It wasn't hard to figure out who was calling the cops, and suddenly her neighbors were not friendly to her, and she wondered why. Her driveway was no longer plowed after a snowstorm by the nice retired man who did all 12 driveways on the road, and the road itself with his huge blower on a tractor. She asked someone to watch her dog and place when going on vacation and was told NO. A guy got tired of her dog in his yard crapping on his lawn and reported the dog regularly, and finally he had enough and shot the dog. The road had an annual bbq get together and she wasn't invited, and she wanted to be. Her car needed a jump start one day, and Nobody would help her. The street was now 11 houses of friends, and 1 enemy. All she had to do was be nice, and mind her own business. Instead she ruffled feathers and ****ed off the neighbors .

Don't be that person!
Click to expand...
I was fully on board with this post until a dog got shot. F that guy.
 
Todd82 said:
I was fully on board with this post until a dog got shot. F that guy.
Click to expand...


The whole thing was absolutely terrible. That was my point, things escalated, and this to could escalate.
The OP needs only worry about his flying, not that guy from another airport, that someone is spreading rumors about.
 
Todd82 said:
I was fully on board with this post until a dog got shot. F that guy.
Click to expand...


I’ve been the guy that finally shot the dog. Complain to animal control numerous times, watch the dog chase deer, ask the owner repeatedly to keep their dog contained. After numerous year, a guy has no other option to solve the problem.
 
It’s all fun and games, until someone loses an eye…

I have to admit to being a bit taken aback by the aggressiveness of some of the replies. The OP raises an issue that we, the GA community, have not always handled well. Too many accidents have occurred that were foreshadowed by numerous red flags, red flags that provided ample opportunity for intervention that might have prevented those accidents.

Far too many accidents have been caused by carelessness, recklessness, willful negligence, and/or intentional noncompliance on the part of pilots and operators. Often those behaviors formed an established a pattern that was known to others in the aviation community well before fate caught up to the rogue and his luck ran out. And too often, the resultant smoking hole was littered with the remains of others whose only mistake was to trust their lives to the wrong people.

When we, the GA community, become aware of the bad actors among us but we fail to take action, then we must shoulder a portion of blame when things go horribly wrong. But we don’t do we? Instead, after the accident, we shake our heads and say things like “bound to happen sooner or later” and “he was an accident waiting to happen.” Meanwhile family members grieve, news reports fan the flames of anti-GA activism, and insurance rates continue to climb for the rest of us.

In the July, 2022 edition of AOPA Pilot, columnist Catherine Cavagnaro puts a sharp point on it, writing, “Years ago, I saw reckless behavior from a local pilot…that pilot later perished in an aviation accident that took the life of someone else as well.” Sadly, I have three similar stories, and many of you have them also. Cavagnaro went on to share that she had reported a more recent safety-of-flight incident, involving a different pilot, to the FAA Hotline, with the hope that a future accident might be prevented (note that there are no data regarding accidents that did not happen).

Back to the OP: Keep in mind that we're talking about a commercial operator, which makes this issue more troubling. The moment an operator sells a seat to the public, a higher degree of care is required and the rules tighten accordingly. I do not advocate making a report to the FAA (or any agency) based on rumors. But IF the commercial tour operator intentionally disabled ADS-B, when ADS-B was required to be operating, it certainly demonstrates willful negligence and intentional noncompliance. Worse still, such an operator is very likely to engage in other acts and behaviors that flaunt regulations and compromise safety, commonly including (but not limited to) shoddy maintenance, substandard training, pencil-whipping documents, failing to comply with regulations and ops specs requirements…the list is long. Investigations often reveal that the bad behaviors we are aware of (the red flags) are only the tip of the iceberg.

Bad actors cause harm to all of us. When they cause accidents we all pay a price, even if we are not directly involved. Some replies to the OP rather strongly suggested that he mind his own business. I disagree: It is OUR business, and our collective best interest, to recognize the red flags of unsafe acts, attitudes, and behaviors, and to do what we can to prevent bad actors from killing themselves and their passengers, and possibly us along with them. A report to the FAA may or may not be the best course of action, but to turn away and do nothing is the worst.

RW
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top