Martha Lunken - Bridges - Log Book Hours?

WDD

WDD

Final Approach
PoA Supporter
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
Messages
6,166
Location
Atlanta / Marietta
Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
Yes, Martha flew under a bridge. FAA has taken away all of her certificates, ratings, and good conduct medals. I heard it was done in a tarmac ceremony with a drummer in the background as she stood at attention while they ripped off her chevrons and epaulettes with the sharp end of a 19th century officers sword.

She needs to re start and get her private license as a student now.

So....
1) She has to take the written test
2) She has to have a CFI sign off on her taking the practical
3) She has to take the practical.

Do any of her log book hours count for anything? Can she reference her log book and go straight from written to a few hours with a CFI for "practical prep", get the sign off and do the practical?

Or does she have to re do the 40 hours (3 hours instrument, long cross country, etc.) as if her log book didn't exist?
 
I don’t see how they can take away hours logged or training received. I would think the only thing she would need is if there’s been a change in requirements for a specific rating since she took the practical and then the 3 hours of preparation within 90 days.
 
I don’t quite understand the point of removing ratings and allowing them back again. Why not just suspend and require a 709 before reinstatement? If ratings are revoked, I would think it should be permanent
 
WDD said:
Yes, Martha flew under a bridge. FAA has taken away all of her certificates, ratings, and good conduct medals. I heard it was done in a tarmac ceremony with a drummer in the background as she stood at attention while they ripped off her chevrons and epaulettes with the sharp end of a 19th century officers sword.

She needs to re start and get her private license as a student now.

So....
1) She has to take the written test
2) She has to have a CFI sign off on her taking the practical
3) She has to take the practical.

Do any of her log book hours count for anything? Can she reference her log book and go straight from written to a few hours with a CFI for "practical prep", get the sign off and do the practical?

Or does she have to re do the 40 hours (3 hours instrument, long cross country, etc.) as if her log book didn't exist?
Click to expand...
I know three people that had certificates revoked. All they had to log with a cfi was the three hours for check ride prep. All their hours counted.

Only one of the three had to use the FAA for all the checking events.
 
Salty said:
I don’t quite understand the point of removing ratings and allowing them back again. Why not just suspend and require a 709 before reinstatement? If ratings are revoked, I would think it should be permanent
Click to expand...
The revocation is permanent. She will not get her certificates back. She might earn new ones though..
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I know three people that had certificates revoked. All they had to log with a cfi was the three hours for check ride prep. All their hours counted.

Only one of the three had to use the FAA for all the checking events.
Click to expand...
And the written tests.
 
Lindberg said:
The revocation is permanent. She will not get her certificates back. She might earn new ones though..
Click to expand...
That implies that a permanent suspension would be more severe than a revocation. Is there any provision for re-earning a certificate, or is this all speculation? I bet Iacra can’t handle it. Lol
 
Salty said:
That implies that a permanent suspension would be more severe than a revocation. Is there any provision for re-earning a certificate, or is this all speculation? I bet Iacra can’t handle it. Lol
Click to expand...
Didn't think of that. Iacra most definitely cannot handle that edge case lol.
 
The ratings come back only if sh
Salty said:
That implies that a permanent suspension would be more severe than a revocation. Is there any provision for re-earning a certificate, or is this all speculation? I bet Iacra can’t handle it. Lol
Click to expand...

She is going to re earn her certificate after her 3 month time out. She said a “few” things have changed since she last took the written.
 
Disclaimer:I don’t know anything about her other than what I have read in her articles. I don’t know her mental state and/or how “with it” she is.

However, if she actually thinks and acts like she portrays in her articles (and maybe they’re embellished)....the biggest thing she needs isn’t instruction, it’s an attitude adjustment. She strikes me as having one of the biggest entitled chips on her shoulder I’ve ever seen. Again, could just be her writing style...but if it’s reality, no amount of instruction and/or checkrides are going to prevent her from repeating her mistakes.
 
I talked to FSDO about ADS-B this morning and the Lunkin case came up. I mentioned how some guys think pulling a breaker calling it “intermittent” is a way to turn off ADS-B. The FAA says if you earn a flight violation and have an ADS-B turn off at the same time it shows intent, and recklessness. The penalty changes as a result. He explained the process and I don’t recall the terms but intent is what earned the harsh penalty.
 
She’s 78. Not changing ……
 
Stewartb said:
I talked to FSDO about ADS-B this morning and the Lunkin case came up. I mentioned how some guys think pulling a breaker calling it “intermittent” is a way to turn off ADS-B. The FAA says if you earn a flight violation and have an ADS-B turn off at the same time it shows intent, and recklessness. The penalty changes as a result. He explained the process and I don’t recall the terms but intent is what earned the harsh penalty.
Click to expand...
It's in the FAA enforcement order 2150.3C

8A3C046C-2322-42F6-9126-0FFADD82D913.jpeg
 
Doc Holliday said:
The previous logged hours account where applicable.
Click to expand...
WDD said:
Yes, Martha flew under a bridge. FAA has taken away all of her certificates, ratings, and good conduct medals. I heard it was done in a tarmac ceremony with a drummer in the background as she stood at attention while they ripped off her chevrons and epaulettes with the sharp end of a 19th century officers sword.

She needs to re start and get her private license as a student now.

So....
1) She has to take the written test
2) She has to have a CFI sign off on her taking the practical
3) She has to take the practical.

Do any of her log book hours count for anything? Can she reference her log book and go straight from written to a few hours with a CFI for "practical prep", get the sign off and do the practical?

Or does she have to re do the 40 hours (3 hours instrument, long cross country, etc.) as if her log book didn't exist?
Click to expand...
Her previously logged hours count, provided there is no issue regarding falsification of recorded flight time.
 
Two hours for the written, 3 hours with a CFI for check ride prep, 6 hours for oral and practical. Next to impossible - but theoretically possible to do the private in one day.
 
"Yes, Martha flew under a bridge. FAA has taken away all of her certificates, ratings, and good conduct medals. I heard it was done in a tarmac ceremony with a drummer in the background as she stood at attention while they ripped off her chevrons and epaulettes with the sharp end of a 19th century officers sword."

I remember that... They take her sword and snap it in half, They throw the pieces out of the stockade gates and send her out into the wilderness. Chuck Connors -- Branded.
 
Salty said:
That implies that a permanent suspension would be more severe than a revocation. Is there any provision for re-earning a certificate, or is this all speculation? I bet Iacra can’t handle it. Lol
Click to expand...
A suspension is temporary by definition. And she's far from the first this has happened to.
 
Omalley1537 said:
She strikes me as having one of the biggest entitled chips on her shoulder I’ve ever seen.
Click to expand...
You think so? It's not her fault that she flies (flew?) out of an airport named after her family, but maybe she didn't have to mention that fact in every article.
 
David Megginson said:
You think so? It's not her fault that she flies (flew?) out of an airport named after her family, but maybe she didn't have to mention that fact in every article.
Click to expand...


She joined that family via a short-lived marriage but kept the name afterward. She hasn’t been part of the Lunken family for decades.
 
Lindberg said:
A suspension is temporary by definition. And she's far from the first this has happened to.
Click to expand...
You would think a revocation would be permanent by definition.
 
I went through the recertification process after the emergency revocations of my airman and medical certificates (previously posted that story here). All of my logged hours counted, but between my original September 11. 1964 certification and my recertification the requirent for dual and solo logged night hours had changed, so I had to take some dual night training.

Martha and I are the same age, both born in the summer of '42.
 
WDD said:
Yes, Martha flew under a bridge. FAA has taken away all of her certificates, ratings, and good conduct medals. I heard it was done in a tarmac ceremony with a drummer in the background as she stood at attention while they ripped off her chevrons and epaulettes with the sharp end of a 19th century officers sword.

She needs to re start and get her private license as a student now.

So....
1) She has to take the written test
2) She has to have a CFI sign off on her taking the practical
3) She has to take the practical.

Do any of her log book hours count for anything? Can she reference her log book and go straight from written to a few hours with a CFI for "practical prep", get the sign off and do the practical?

Or does she have to re do the 40 hours (3 hours instrument, long cross country, etc.) as if her log book didn't exist?
Click to expand...

This is not about her certificate, but to demonstrate that she is not above the law.
 
But not permanent in that she can go get replacement certificates and fly again. She’s not banned from ever getting her PPL and whatnot back. Semantics I guess.
 
Though I have never liked that use of the term "semantics". Shouldn't semantics, that is meaning, be important?

But in any case, there are two definitions of permanent at work here - "
Definition of permanent
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: continuing or enduring without fundamental or marked change : STABLEthe museum's permanent art collectionan accident causing permanent injury
2a: not easily removed, washed away, or erased : INDELIBLE sense 1apermanent stains"
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Though I have never liked that use of the term "semantics". Shouldn't semantics, that is meaning, be important?

But in any case, there are two definitions of permanent at work here - "
Definition of permanent
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: continuing or enduring without fundamental or marked change : STABLEthe museum's permanent art collectionan accident causing permanent injury
2a: not easily removed, washed away, or erased : INDELIBLE sense 1apermanent stains"
Click to expand...
Peter, revocations of certificates are permanent. Typically though, a pilot who has had certificates revoked can petition the FAA for recertification after one calendar year. The original certificate is dead and gone, but if the application for recertification is granted by the FAA and the airman goes through the hoops of getting a new medical certificate (typically the physical exam is performed by a senior AME designated by the regional flight surgeon and the OKC good doctors pour over all of the airman's medical records), passing the written, oral, and practical tests, a new airman certificate is issued with a new certificate number. The original certificate revocation is permanent, and a new certificate is issued after recertification.

Ask me how I know. ;)
 
Last edited:
Semantics / a good name for an 80’s rock group
 
Stan Cooper said:
Peter, revocations of certificates is permanent. Typically though, a pilot who has had certificates revoked can petition the FAA for recertification after one calendar year. The original certificate is dead and gone, but if the application for recertification is granted by the FAA and the airman goes through the hoops of getting a new medical certificate (typically the physical exam is performed by a senior AME designated by the regional flight surgeon and the OKC good doctors pour over all of the airman's medical records), passing the written, oral, and practical tests, a new airman certificate is issued with a new certificate number. The original certificate revocation is permanent, and a new certificate is issued after recertification.

Ask me how I know. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, I see the point. But I think @Salty ‘s point was - if a person has been a bad actor and had their certificates revoked, why isn’t their ability to hold a certificate permanently removed?

Perhaps some of the aviation attorneys will chime in on whether their was prior case law that challenged such a form of permanence.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Yes, I see the point. But I think @Salty ‘s point was - if a person has been a bad actor and had their certificates revoked, why isn’t their ability to hold a certificate permanently removed?

Perhaps some of the aviation attorneys will chime in on whether their was prior case law that challenged such a form of permanence.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the revocations are made in haste without any serious attempt to learn all the facts. Investigations are often sloppy and investigators make assumptions that aren't factual, so the recertification process is a means to right what may have been a questionable order of revocation.

The Pilots' Bill of Rights has been helpful in avoiding ill advised revocations, but the law was passed too late for many.
 
WDD said:
But not permanent in that she can go get replacement certificates and fly again. She’s not banned from ever getting her PPL and whatnot back. Semantics I guess.
Click to expand...
If I put your car in a car crusher, it's destruction is permanent. That doesn't mean you'll never again have a car, it just means you'll never again have that car. Same thing here. She's not banned from flying, she's just had her certificates revoked.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Yes, I see the point. But I think @Salty ‘s point was - if a person has been a bad actor and had their certificates revoked, why isn’t their ability to hold a certificate permanently removed?

Perhaps some of the aviation attorneys will chime in on whether their was prior case law that challenged such a form of permanence.
Click to expand...
That’s right.

I don’t understand the point of revocation if you can just get a new cert. how is getting the cert again doing anything to change her behavior?

again, if it’s not meant to be permanent, then why not just suspend?

it doesn’t really matter, as it is what it is, it just doesn’t make sense to me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top