FSDO inspector verbal interpretation

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,489
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name

Display name:
Brien
How are we the pilots who fly the planes suppose to understand the FAR'S, when we can't get the same answer to a question from different Operation's Inspectors in the same FSDO . If you get a answer to a question out of their area of expertise like asking a PMI a operations questions and then ask a POI the same question who knows what you will get. Worst possible ask a PAI a question as they know everything and all the others spoke out of school? To sum it up most FAA people try to work together, and they will circle their wagons to get you, should you step over the line. :mad2:
 
Don't ask, don't tell. Don't give a bleep(rules out being a pro.) I assume you are not talking about flying around drunk tossing dead hookers out of the plane. For a gray area transgression what's a hobby pilot going to get? Worst case month or two on the bench and somewhat higher insurance rates. Meh whatever. Take the ego out of infractions, think of them as parking tickets, and there ain't nothing to worry about.
 
tossing dead hookers out of the plane
There actually is no violation tossing dead hookers from the plane (assuming no hazard to anyone on the ground).

Tossing live ones, however.......
 
...and if the FAA Counsel ever gets involved and says that what you're doing is not legal, that Inspector will deny under oath ever having told you what you think you heard. If you really need to know for sure, the only way to get it is in writing over an FAA Counsel's signature. Anything is at best unreliable and at worst deniable.
 
...and if the FAA Counsel ever gets involved and says that what you're doing is not legal, that Inspector will deny under oath ever having told you what you think you heard. If you really need to know for sure, the only way to get it is in writing over an FAA Counsel's signature. Anything is at best unreliable and at worst deniable.

So much for your belief in the FAA, Every thing you have said in the past about the field inspectors is out the window.

plus the statement you made about Rotor head being anonymous says it all.
 
Ask very nicely for the inspector to put it in writing. I bet any discussion will end right there.
 
Ask very nicely for the inspector to put it in writing. I bet any discussion will end right there.

In my experience the inspectors will simply tell you which FAR applies or show the AC/method they will approve.

You'll find they ask more questions than they give answers.
 
...and if the FAA Counsel ever gets involved and says that what you're doing is not legal, that Inspector will deny under oath ever having told you what you think you heard. If you really need to know for sure, the only way to get it is in writing over an FAA Counsel's signature. Anything is at best unreliable and at worst deniable.

And yet, many times in the past, you have written, "If you don't believe me, call AFS-800," or something to that effect!
 
There actually is no violation tossing dead hookers from the plane (assuming no hazard to anyone on the ground).

Tossing live ones, however.......

If you do this to avoid paying the hooker, wouldn't this be a violation of 61.113

or is it only "incidental"
 
...and if the FAA Counsel ever gets involved and says that what you're doing is not legal, that Inspector will deny under oath ever having told you what you think you heard. If you really need to know for sure, the only way to get it is in writing over an FAA Counsel's signature. Anything is at best unreliable and at worst deniable.

Good luck with that. Many moons ago, when I lived in Cal City, I asked two inspectors from two different FSDO's about sky divers landing on the runway. Got two different answers and neither one would put anything in writing.
 
Yeah but, if you got the header in flight that would be considered compensation :D
 
Yeah but, if you got the header in flight that would be considered compensation :D

Yeah, but that chopper pilot had a commercial rating, so.......
The lesson from that is NEVER film anything. Do not create evidence for someone to use against you.
 
And yet, many times in the past, you have written, "If you don't believe me, call AFS-800," or something to that effect!
I have, when the subject is policy controlled by AFS-800, such as FSDO Operations procedures, Operations Inspector behavior, or practical test conduct, not regulation interpretation. If you ask an FAA Counsel about those things, they'll tell you the same thing I did -- ask AFS-800. But if you ask AFS-800 about interpretation of a regulation, they'll tell you the same thing I did about that -- if you want a legally reliable answer, ask an FAA Counsel.
 
Good luck with that. Many moons ago, when I lived in Cal City, I asked two inspectors from two different FSDO's about sky divers landing on the runway. Got two different answers and neither one would put anything in writing.
That's why I said you have to ask the Counsel, not an Inspector.
 
I have, when the subject is policy controlled by AFS-800, such as FSDO Operations procedures, Operations Inspector behavior, or practical test conduct, not regulation interpretation. If you ask an FAA Counsel about those things, they'll tell you the same thing I did -- ask AFS-800. But if you ask AFS-800 about interpretation of a regulation, they'll tell you the same thing I did about that -- if you want a legally reliable answer, ask an FAA Counsel.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37v-6Zs5T10


:D



Mike
 
I feel like there are two topics being discussed in this thread.... Half of yall are talking about FSDO inspectors and the other half are talking about dead hookers. I'm starting to get confused. Why are we dropping inspectors out of the plane, and more importantly why are we asking for hookers to put anything in writing?
 
I feel like there are two topics being discussed in this thread.... Half of yall are talking about FSDO inspectors and the other half are talking about dead hookers. I'm starting to get confused. Why are we dropping inspectors out of the plane, and more importantly why are we asking for hookers to put anything in writing?

:rofl::rofl:
 
I feel like there are two topics being discussed in this thread.... Half of yall are talking about FSDO inspectors and the other half are talking about dead hookers. I'm starting to get confused. Why are we dropping inspectors out of the plane, and more importantly why are we asking for hookers to put anything in writing?

Stick around, in 5 more posts we will be discussing an all together different subject. :)
 
Half of yall are talking about FSDO inspectors and the other half are talking about dead hookers. I'm starting to get confused. Why are we dropping inspectors out of the plane, and more importantly why are we asking for hookers to put anything in writing?

Aren't they from the same mold and deserving of the same fate? :D
 
I feel like there are two topics being discussed in this thread.... Half of yall are talking about FSDO inspectors and the other half are talking about dead hookers. I'm starting to get confused. Why are we dropping inspectors out of the plane, and more importantly why are we asking for hookers to put anything in writing?

So the FSDO inspector says to Schrödinger, "Do you know you have a dead hooker in the baggage compartment of your airplane?" Schrödinger replies "I do now".
 
I have, when the subject is policy controlled by AFS-800, such as FSDO Operations procedures, Operations Inspector behavior, or practical test conduct, not regulation interpretation. If you ask an FAA Counsel about those things, they'll tell you the same thing I did -- ask AFS-800. But if you ask AFS-800 about interpretation of a regulation, they'll tell you the same thing I did about that -- if you want a legally reliable answer, ask an FAA Counsel.

I wasn't talking about whom to ask. I was just pointing out that you now say that people should get it in writing, yet there have been many occasions when you have suggested that people "call" an FAA office to settle a dispute about what's legal and what isn't.
 
I wasn't talking about whom to ask. I was just pointing out that you now say that people should get it in writing, yet there have been many occasions when you have suggested that people "call" an FAA office to settle a dispute about what's legal and what isn't.
I have, and I do. But many folks here seem to want an iron-clad guaranteed reliable legal interpretation, and for that, you need it in writing over a Counsel's signature.
 
...and if the FAA Counsel ever gets involved and says that what you're doing is not legal, that Inspector will deny under oath ever having told you what you think you heard. If you really need to know for sure, the only way to get it is in writing over an FAA Counsel's signature. Anything is at best unreliable and at worst deniable.


For heaven's sake, DON'T DO THAT UNLESS YOUR LAWYER TELLS YOU TO.!!! And he won't unless you are running a commerical operation of some sort and about to invest a lot of money based on a FAR interpretation. And pay the lawyer a lot for him to carefully write your question, including a full study of the existing black letter and case law supporting the answer you want.

If you are just Joe CFI and write a letter to settle a bar bet, you are screwing the aviation community.

I can guarendamnteeyou that you will get the most restrictive possible answer that the intern who drafts the response can conjure up.

By dashing off a letter you could very likely create a brand few 'FAR', that could take years to correct when adults realize how stupid the madcap FAA lawyers can be.
 
For heaven's sake, DON'T DO THAT UNLESS YOUR LAWYER TELLS YOU TO.!!! And he won't unless you are running a commerical operation of some sort and about to invest a lot of money based on a FAR interpretation. And pay the lawyer a lot for him to carefully write your question, including a full study of the existing black letter and case law supporting the answer you want.

If you are just Joe CFI and write a letter to settle a bar bet, you are screwing the aviation community.

I can guarendamnteeyou that you will get the most restrictive possible answer that the intern who drafts the response can conjure up.

By dashing off a letter you could very likely create a brand few 'FAR', that could take years to correct when adults realize how stupid the madcap FAA lawyers can be.

I'm sure the folks in the CC office really hate the Internet and aviation forums.
 
Good luck with that. Many moons ago, when I lived in Cal City, I asked two inspectors from two different FSDO's about sky divers landing on the runway. Got two different answers and neither one would put anything in writing.
He'll, I got two different answers once from different inspectors at the same FSDO!
 
For heaven's sake, DON'T DO THAT UNLESS YOUR LAWYER TELLS YOU TO.!!! And he won't unless you are running a commerical operation of some sort and about to invest a lot of money based on a FAR interpretation. And pay the lawyer a lot for him to carefully write your question, including a full study of the existing black letter and case law supporting the answer you want.

If you are just Joe CFI and write a letter to settle a bar bet, you are screwing the aviation community.

I can guarendamnteeyou that you will get the most restrictive possible answer that the intern who drafts the response can conjure up.

By dashing off a letter you could very likely create a brand few 'FAR', that could take years to correct when adults realize how stupid the madcap FAA lawyers can be.
Classic example: Mangiamele. :(
 
He'll, I got two different answers once from different inspectors at the same FSDO!

Why should the FSDO guys and gals be any better at guessing what the FARs actually mean as anyone else.

Document the answer you liked the best (who/what/when/where) and be happy.
 
Why should the FSDO guys and gals be any better at guessing what the FARs actually mean as anyone else.

Document the answer you liked the best (who/what/when/where) and be happy.

Reality check.

While working at the FSDO most of our "interpretations" involved Part 135 operations (and a few 133's and 137's). It typically was an operator asking the POI (or PMI/PAI) for clarification on small issues. Nothing ever involving Chief Counsel "interpretations" or anything involved.

At the CMO pretty much the same thing (Part 121).

NEVER did we get "If I fly my two buddies to get a hamburger how do I stay legal?" or "Is it compensation if I fly the flight school airplane over to the avionics shop?" type questions.

While on phone duty the questions were rather simplistic (if not idiotic) and the caller could have answered the question themselves if they would have taken the time to look for it.

And then there were "But I read on the internet...." types.
 
Back
Top