Got a Call from FSDO Today..

Debonair Driver said:
Hard to ignore a phone call but any non-mandatory response request by mail would be circular filed by me. I only see gotchas with these kind of inquiries.
Click to expand...
It's not difficult. Let it go to voicemail. It's actually one of the first two pieces of advice I give when representing an airman, but letting all unknown numbers go to voicemail is not a bad general policy.
 
Banjo33 said:
But it sounds like it has gone beyond just a simple phone call....they are actually asking for logbook entries. A phone call from the FAA wouldn’t be too alarming and might even be welcome, asking to review the airplane logs sure sounds like they are “after” something.
Click to expand...
Are you reading the same original post as I am?

Of course, if it does go further, it's be a different story.
 
jimmyjack said:
I think the proper response will be, "I am happy to answer any and all questions my attorney deems reasonable." *click*
Click to expand...
I've known inspectors who like that game too much.

"In a few months, this will all go away, but for now his attorney is making about $100 a week on piddly little questions."
 
Radar Contact said:
If this was in response to me not declaring, a few questions for you...

Just departed, clear and million, minor oil top of cowl, oil temps and pressure perfect, engine making normal power and operating smoothly, would you still declare? What if you were in a twin lightly loaded?

More importantly, what is the declaration in this example going to get you?
Click to expand...
I think most of us were reacting to not being sure of making the runway. That phrase doesn't sound anything like some minor oil seepage on top of cowl with nothing else to show something is wrong.

Personally, "what is it going to get me" is a question I would not want to be wasting brainpower on in case of a malfunction. Keying the mic and saying you have a problem is so easy and takes no time away from the important stuff.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I'm not sure why you said, "no emergency" when making a runway is in doubt, but, be that as it may, it seems declaring it or not has nothing to do with this type of follow up. I'm not sure what does since, both now and in the past, I've seen examples in which one might expect at least a polite inquiry but it didn't happen, and vice versa.
Click to expand...

I had no doubt I would get down safely, one place or another.
If I ended up on the runway, all would be fine.
If I ended up on the highway, there was nothing the airport could do. I'd give them a call and tell them where I was, after I was down.
I have a very limited definition of "emergency" when referring to something flying related.
"Emergency" only gets called if I'm sure there will be a fire, someone in the plane is incapacitated, or there will be blood and gore.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I've known inspectors who like that game too much.

"In a few months, this will all go away, but for now his attorney is making about $100 a week on piddly little questions."
Click to expand...

A $100/week? Whats his contact info?
 
midlifeflyer said:
It's not difficult. Let it go to voicemail. It's actually one of the first two pieces of advice I give when representing an airman, but letting all unknown numbers go to voicemail is not a bad general policy.
Click to expand...

Good advice. There are other phone calls I'd appreciate missing too
 
midlifeflyer said:
It's not difficult. Let it go to voicemail. It's actually one of the first two pieces of advice I give when representing an airman, but letting all unknown numbers go to voicemail is not a bad general policy.
Click to expand...

Learned that quick flying at the airline. NEVER answer your phone!
 
It seems the FAA has gotten more curious over the years. Used to be a diversion in flight you didn't have to give a reason. These days they always seem to ask if I don't offer one.

At towered fields, commercial operators who rejected a takeoff or whatever frequently got a call asking why, not so much private operators. I've had plenty of those at IAD over the years.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Are you reading the same original post as I am?

Of course, if it does go further, it's be a different story.
Click to expand...

Not the OPs incident, but PlanoPilot and Radar Contact both mention the FAA asking for logbook entries in their case.
 
Shepherd said:
I had no doubt I would get down safely, one place or another.
If I ended up on the runway, all would be fine.
If I ended up on the highway, there was nothing the airport could do. I'd give them a call and tell them where I was, after I was down.
I have a very limited definition of "emergency" when referring to something flying related.
"Emergency" only gets called if I'm sure there will be a fire, someone in the plane is incapacitated, or there will be blood and gore.
Click to expand...
Yep, I guess YMMV. I don't need certainty of a bad result. I can't think of any emergency I had which had that level of certainty. Even my loss of power in the clouds over the Rockies. I was never sure of a fire, passenger incapacity or blood and gore, and, in fact, none of that happened. Heck there probably would have been a disaster if I was sure of a disaster.

I've also seen situations in which not declaring an emergency resulted in formal enforcement action against a pilot (in one, it was resolved satisfactorily but wouldn't have gotten even that far if he had)
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
$100 a week, as in, "This week's piddly little question that has no impact on the outcome, but takes 15 minutes of attorney time is..."
Click to expand...
"Piddly little questions" are kind of like "stupid questions" (those not asked). Something I can answer in a 10-minute phone call or email may not be piddly or inconsequential to the person asking.
 
midlifeflyer said:
"Piddly little questions" are kind of like "stupid questions" (those not asked). Something I can answer in a 10-minute phone call or email may not be piddly or inconsequential to the person asking.
Click to expand...
Thats not the impression I got from the guy asking the questions.
 
not the correct answer.....unless you want remedial training.....o_O
 
Radar Contact said:
If this was in response to me not declaring, a few questions for you...

Just departed, clear and million, minor oil top of cowl, oil temps and pressure perfect, engine making normal power and operating smoothly, would you still declare? What if you were in a twin lightly loaded?

More importantly, what is the declaration in this example going to get you?
Click to expand...
Priority handling. Oil coming out is not normal, something is wrong, at that point I don't know whether it's minor or at what point it will be major and if all the oil will come out or not. If I don't and I am number 4 to land, I don't want to find out if it's minor or major while still number 2 to land behind a jet with no oil pressure.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Forgot to "go" before you left.
Legit excuse.
'splains why you may be in a hurry to get down.
No question about airworthiness.
No log entry required.
Click to expand...
One of the old timers I started out with insisted that any time the controller asked why we diverted the answer was always physiological needs unless we had declared an emergency. Just an FYI that stops working when you get in something big enough that everyone knows it has a lavatory.
 
Lachlan said:
FAA guy- “Sir, please tell us what you forgot.”

Flyer “To properly secure the oil filler cap.”

:D
Click to expand...

This ain't boot camp, and I'm not answering the drill sergeant.

Flyer: if I knew what I forgot, I wouldn't have forgotten it.
 
Banjo33 said:
Not the OPs incident, but PlanoPilot and Radar Contact both mention the FAA asking for logbook entries in their case.
Click to expand...
I had another instance around the same time in the 340. It was an after annual test flight where I lost one alternator. I believe ATC declared an emergency for us, started asking souls and fuel on board. Fire trucks chased us down, I said this is not an emergency I have not even turned off the air conditioner! The other alternator had no problem covering the load. I never heard any thing from the FAA.
 
They oughta ditch "asking how many souls". Too death oriented. Just ask how many people on board ok?
 
Last edited:
Lachlan said:
FAA guy- “Sir, please tell us what you forgot.”

Flyer “To properly secure the oil filler cap.”

:D
Click to expand...
No joke, although not necessarily the cap. I was doing an annual Christmas lights flight with my wife. After takeoff, I saw the oil filler door flapping. I radioed Tower I needed to land. They asked if I had a problem. I replied, "No, just an idiot pilot."

That may in fact be a strategy. ATC is typically going to ask the reason for the return in order to make sure you don't need an assist. I suspect your answer is one of the differences between getting an not getting a follow-up call.
 
Plano Pilot said:
I had another instance around the same time in the 340. It was an after annual test flight where I lost one alternator. I believe ATC declared an emergency for us, started asking souls and fuel on board. Fire trucks chased us down, I said this is not an emergency I have not even turned off the air conditioner! The other alternator had no problem covering the load. I never heard any thing from the FAA.
Click to expand...

There has been a few times I did not declare an emergency but I have asked for the emergency trucks.

Because sometimes their budget depends on how many times they were called out during the year

And once on the ground I make it a habit to introduce myself to the responders, thank them for their duty, or apologize for waking them up. Then I send pizza to them.
 
I ownder how much of the
wsuffa said:
Justifying a budget.
Click to expand...
Nope. Definitely not that. Not in this period of heavy budget cuts. ASIs are overworked and have far more important things to do with their time. Yes, there will always be "cowboys" out there who feel the need to puff out their chests and show off their power. But for the most part, these kinds of investigatory jobs are extra work. And ASIs like extra work without extra pay about as much as we do.
 
coloradobluesky said:
They outa ditch "asking how many souls". Too death oriented. Just ask how many people on board ok?
Click to expand...

What if the cargo is a dead body being transported home..??

I would answer X number of souls and one dead body in transport.
 
mscard88 said:
Learned that quick flying at the airline. NEVER answer your phone!
Click to expand...

Ever keep a beer next to the phone..???? :lol::lol: :cheers:

I worked for a cheap charter company. I was not the next pilot up so 10 minutes to off duty I popped a top..... phone rang 1 minute later. I tell the boss I already started drinking. He said stop drinking and come on in.







I refused.
 
My guess is the controller reported the aborted take off and FSDO was just doing a follow up 5 days later..:rolleyes: The PAIM complemented me on my actions. I sorta laughed, who is going to lift off with an airspeed indicator that is not working. Not me that's for sure.

The funny thing is I have an O-320 and have been gathering information for a possible upgrade to an O-360. I explained that to the PAIM that called. The University of Illinois had at one time received several B-19 Sports with the O-360 installed. He told me since it the upgrade had been done in the past it would only be a little paperwork to get the installation approved. He gave me the name of another PAIM to contact.

Not that I can afford the upgrade to an O-360 now, I think I will call him for an appointment just for kicks..:)
 
AKBill said:
Got a call from the local FSDO today. I aborted a take off last Sunday because I had no airspeed indication when the plane was ready to rotate. Ice in the pito tube. The tube had a cover on it and it was removed prior to flight.

I heated the tube and cleared the blockage and took off no problems. I did check the tube prior to the flight and it looked good.

Nice chat with Matthew from FSDO, just never had FSDO call me for an aborted take off before.
Click to expand...

In my 2000-ish takeoffs from Juneau International, I've rejected 2. Perhaps being a part 135 flight has something to do with it, but they both generated a phone call to the company DO. But that's as far as it goes unless there was a major mechanical that caused the rejected takeoff.
 
midlifeflyer said:
...Personally, "what is it going to get me" is a question I would not want to be wasting brainpower on in case of a malfunction. Keying the mic and saying you have a problem is so easy and takes no time away from the important stuff.
Click to expand...
Amen. I find declaring to be very freeing; I no longer need to spend any mental bandwidth on deciding whether the situation has gotten bad enough to declare.

Tarheelpilot said:
My decision matrix for declaring:
If I need priority handling to land - declare
If I want the fire trucks standing by-declare
If I have to deviate from a clearance - declare

Any other abnormal I’ll advise atc only if the situation causes performance limitations that affect my ability to comply with normal instructions or standard performance expectations. In these cases I don’t declare...
Click to expand...

My decision matrix is much simpler:

If I have doubt about the safe outcome of the flight - declare

I don't want to tie up mental bandwidth going through a several step process to decide what to say on the radio when I have more important things to think about.
 
Zeldman said:
Ever keep a beer next to the phone..???? :lol::lol: :cheers:

I worked for a cheap charter company. I was not the next pilot up so 10 minutes to off duty I popped a top..... phone rang 1 minute later. I tell the boss I already started drinking. He said stop drinking and come on in.
I refused.
Click to expand...

Yeah had a scheduler call when I was off duty. Had opened a beer and told her the same. Same response, can you come in. **** no I said.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I ownder how much of the

Nope. Definitely not that. Not in this period of heavy budget cuts. ASIs are overworked and have far more important things to do with their time. Yes, there will always be "cowboys" out there who feel the need to puff out their chests and show off their power. But for the most part, these kinds of investigatory jobs are extra work. And ASIs like extra work without extra pay about as much as we do.
Click to expand...
In the perverse way government works, sometimes the strategy is to do this sort of thing to show that more money is needed because folks are overworked and SAFETY IS SUFFERING. At least that's the way some top bureaucrats see it. Not saying it's right.

And I have, in the long past, worked with a couple of those cowboy types.
 
What if they offered a free hat in exchange for your time and information?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top