Student "instructor"

U

Unregistered

Guest
I don't wish to be identified as the guy who dropped the dime on this dimwit so I logged out.
We have a permanent student on our airpark who breaks every rule at every opportunity.
He regularly carries passengers.
Yesterday he was giving "instruction" to another non pilot. For most of the episode he had an open mike. Everything he was saying to his "student" was carried over the air. It was almost like he was keying his mike when he talked on the intercom since the carrier wasn't constant.

Of course the weather was perfect and almost every airpark resident was either flying or listening on their hangar radios.

Finally someone got his attention on the radio and informed him that he was transmitting to the world.

He replied to his "student" "Don't listen to them. They're idiots!"

Living on the airpark is better than daytime television. :)
 
And when he finally kills someone, the feds will ask the rest of the airpark denizens what they knew about the situation and why they didn't turn him in sooner.

Dan
 
Too many pilots look the other way,do you really want to be in the same airspace. Even when trying to help him ,he doesn't listen and everyone but himself is an idiot.
 
Doesn't matter. When you live in a neighborhood and one of your neighbors is cooking meth, it's your business.

When you live at an airpark and someone there is behaving like this, it's your business. All it takes is an accident and suddenly the entire community surrounding the airpark will be clamoring for its closure since it's OBVIOUS that pilots can't be trusted to regulate themselves.

Honor does not mean "don't rat out anyone else, ever".
 
It's time for an intervention. A good, great, instructor would convince that guy to finish his certificate.

If that does not work, it's time to bring in the FSDO.
But based on what has been posted, this guy will continue to fly without a certificate if e has access to an airplane.

The CFI that signed his student endorsement needs to file a letter with the FSDO that he is no longer responsible for the actions of this student.
 
OK. For the sake of GA I will start reporting fat pilots that look sleepy to the FAA. Considering the correlation and threat to airsafety I have the duty to do so. 'he was staring at his phone and just seemed to doze off, yeah he is heavy' If fat pilots got nothing to hide fat pilots got nothing to fear. And if fat pilots do have apnea they, their families, and the GA community owe me a thank you. Many of you will be getting certified letters in the mail.
 
ClimbnSink said:
OK. For the sake of GA I will start reporting fat pilots that look sleepy to the FAA. Considering the correlation and threat to airsafety I have the duty to do so. 'he was staring at his phone and just seemed to doze off, yeah he is heavy' If fat pilots got nothing to hide fat pilots got nothing to fear. And if fat pilots do have apnea they, their families, and the GA community owe me a thank you. Many of you will be getting certified letters in the mail.
Click to expand...
It is unfortunate that we have people with Greg's sort of attitude in our midst. It certainly doesn't help our cause. Unfortunately, there is little we can do about people who say things like that as long as they obey the rules when they fly. The party under discussion, however, is hazarding not only himself, but his "students" and any one over whom he flies -- that requires action to put an end to his shenanigans before someone is hurt or killed and GA gets another black eye.
 
Last edited:
ClimbnSink said:
OK. For the sake of GA I will start reporting fat pilots that look sleepy to the FAA. Considering the correlation and threat to airsafety I have the duty to do so. 'he was staring at his phone and just seemed to doze off, yeah he is heavy' If fat pilots got nothing to hide fat pilots got nothing to fear. And if fat pilots do have apnea they, their families, and the GA community owe me a thank you. Many of you will be getting certified letters in the mail.
Click to expand...

If you can't tell the difference between someone who MIGHT have a problem ( a fat pilot) and someone who DOES have a problem (an uncertificated pilot taking passengers and giving "instruction")....
 
"He replied to his "student" "Don't listen to them. They're idiots!""

That statement certainly confirms his attitude is not one of compliance. It's almost a certainty the guy is going to get his a$$, and probably someone else's killed and give the airpark a bad name and possibly some legal problems in the near future. I would classify him the same as a continual reckless driver who needs to be removed from the road.

If others heard the transmissions and know there's trouble ahead I say 'drop the dime'. We get enough flak from the media when a perfectly legal pilot has a bad outcome. We don't need non-conformists adding fuel to the fire.
 
TMetzinger said:
If you can't tell the difference between someone who MIGHT have a problem ( a fat pilot) and someone who DOES have a problem (an uncertificated pilot taking passengers and giving "instruction")....
Click to expand...

Greater then .9 correlation that fat pilots are medically unfit, thus just as illegal as no ticket pilots. The tiny percentage of fatties that don't have apnea can have their sleep study and get back to flying. The others I hope would at least serve a suspension for putting themselves and innocent others at risk. GA can't afford the bad PR of overweight flying narcolepsy units filling the skies.
 
Ron Levy said:
It is unfortunate that we have people with Greg's sort of attitude in our midst. It certainly doesn't help our cause. Unfortunately, there is little we can do about people who say things like that as long as they obey the rules when they fly. The party under discussion, however, is hazarding not only himself, but his "students" and any one over whom he flies -- that requires action to put an end to his shenanigans before someone is hurt or killed and GA gets another black eye.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
 
Ron Levy said:
The party under discussion, however, is hazarding not only himself, but his "students" and any one over whom he flies -- that requires action to put an end to his shenanigans before someone is hurt or killed and GA gets another black eye.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
 
Unregistered said:
I don't wish to be identified as the guy who dropped the dime on this dimwit so I logged out.
We have a permanent student on our airpark who breaks every rule at every opportunity.
Click to expand...

Have you spoken to him about his past or current violations? Has anyone else?
 
Hit him with the book; I have no sympathy for people who don't take flying as seriously as it should and needs to be. I don't want him in the air if he's got such a cavalier attitude to flying and neither should anyone else.
 
When I lived in Virgina I was mowing my lawn one day and a biplane flew right over my house at about 30 feet above the roof. He circled my block a couple of times at tree top level.

I got his N-number and called the nearby tower. I found out later he was a neighbor who was showing someone his house.

I don't know what action the FAA took, if any, but he didn't ever come buzzing over the neighborhood again.

I felt just fine about making that call.
 
Unregistered said:
We have a permanent student on our airpark who breaks every rule at every opportunity.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious...

Can you elaborate on the rules he breaks? (besides carrying passengers).

Also, when you say "permanent student"...does he have 100 hours or 1000 hours?

As far as what to do...

I'm in the "bust him" camp. His actions are similar to to those of the multitude of pilots I've met over the years who are flying without a medical. I have always told them, "fly all you want to---SOLO---I won't rat you out. But let me catch you carrying unwitting passengers and the FAA will know before the end of the day."

Which brings up another question...does this guy even have a medical?
 
In 30+ years as a pilot and instructor, I've dropped exactly one dime.

I was at a "Superstars" competition on Key Biscayne. A small plane buzzed the beach, just offshore, at what I estimated to be 50'.

What got my attention was that it was my plane!!!

A Grumman Traveler I rented out, and had rented out that day.

In the interest of self-preservation, I did call the FAA to report the infraction, and the name of the renter pilot. I wanted it perfectly clear that if others reported the incident, it was known that I was NOT the pilot.

Back to the case in question, I think I would drop a second dime if I knew of such infractions. It would be to assuage myself of the guilt I would feel if I did not do so and the fellow later managed to kill himself and/or others from continued stupid acts.

"Evil prospers when good men do nothing." - attributed to Edmund Burke
 
TMetzinger said:
If you can't tell the difference between someone who MIGHT have a problem ( a fat pilot) and someone who DOES have a problem (an uncertificated pilot taking passengers and giving "instruction")....
Click to expand...

It's worse than that. Apparently, he can't even tell, or doesn't care, when someone is breaking the law. As these laws get tighter and tighter because of idiots like the subject of the OP, and people that don't care, we will all have to pay the price.
 
JOhnH said:
It's worse than that. Apparently, he can't even tell, or doesn't care, when someone is breaking the law. As these laws get tighter and tighter because of idiots like the subject of the OP, and people that don't care, we will all have to pay the price.
Click to expand...

You are right and I agree with you. I care when people break the law, which is why I'm calling jihad on fat pilots. Just as you say about things getting tighter. Fat pilots have to pay the sleep study price, because of fat pilots flying when they are medically unfit(just as bad as flying without a certificate, maybe worse.) Another sleepy fatty screwing up will cost us all.
 
If there were a teenager with only a learner's permit roaring up and down my street while chugging a Michelob, I'd damn well call the cops. No difference.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Fat pilots have to pay the sleep study price, because of fat pilots flying when they are medically unfit(just as bad as flying without a certificate, maybe worse.)
Click to expand...


...only problem is that we HAVE a legal medical certification process that already determines is a pilot is unfit or not every several years.

I will rely on that more than your armchair opinion diagnosis of who is breaking the law.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Fat pilots have to pay the sleep study price, because of fat pilots flying when they are medically unfit(just as bad as flying without a certificate, maybe worse.) Another sleepy fatty screwing up will cost us all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because that's totally the same thing, and clearly the real world is no place for common sense. However, I suspect you're intentionally being obtuse just to get a reaction.

My vote is to confront the guy and tell him to stop (if you haven't already), and if he continues, turn him in. Don't let him kill someone.
 
JOhnH said:
It's worse than that. Apparently, he can't even tell, or doesn't care, when someone is breaking the law. As these laws get tighter and tighter because of idiots like the subject of the OP, and people that don't care, we will all have to pay the price.
Click to expand...

Just to play devil's advocate, is there a point when "these laws get tighter and tighter because of idiots" at which you say: "hey, these laws are getting ridiculous and unjust"...or do you just follow along with "hey, it's the LAW and must be obeyed no matter what!!!"

I don't have a dog in this fight, just pointing out that just because something is a law, doesn't mean that it must (or even should) be obeyed unquestioningly. I don't think just saying something is a law immediately grants it moral authority. Numerous examples should immediately spring to mind.
 
bullwinkle said:
Just to play devil's advocate, is there a point when "these laws get tighter and tighter because of idiots" at which you say: "hey, these laws are getting ridiculous and unjust"...or do you just follow along with "hey, it's the LAW and must be obeyed no matter what!!!"
Click to expand...
If you don't like the law, get it changed. Unfortunately, that works both ways -- and aviation's enemies are more numerous than we are. That's why I am an AOPA member and contribute to AOPA PAC -- they can fight these battles for us effectively, as opposed to the pointlessness of ranting about rules on web sites like these. But when it comes to failing to obey the laws we don't like, remember that civil disobedience has its price -- one which Mr. Thoreau was willing to pay over his issues of concern, but one I doubt many here are willing to pay over these sorts of issues. And keep in mind that pilots who break the rules create bad publicity which only makes it harder for our positions to be accepted by lawmakers.
 
I think we've drifted pretty far from the OP.

There are laws and there are laws. It's difficult to make a cross-country flight without possibly running afoul of some technicality or the other.

But we're talking about a student pilot flying around with passengers, totally disregarding regs at a time when they should be sacrosanct.

There are times when looking the other way might be appropriate.

For me, this is not one of those.
 
FastEddieB said:
I think we've drifted pretty far from the OP.

There are laws and there are laws. It's difficult to make a cross-country flight without possibly running afoul of some technicality or the other.

But we're talking about a student pilot flying around with passengers, totally disregarding regs at a time when they should be sacrosanct.

There are times when looking the other way might be appropriate.

For me, this is not one of those.
Click to expand...

I agree, I don't think laws that endanger innocent people other than the pilot should be ignored, I'm just pointing out that something is not right just because it's a law. "Just get the law changed" doesn't really cut it in all circumstances either.
 
The Fat's in the fire. The president of the airpark HOA who is also the airport manager is going to report him. This is not the first such incident. The chap involved has been talked to before with no result.

He generally seems to hold laws and regulations in contempt.

I was considering buying one of those metal "flight instruction given here" signs and putting it on his hangar in the middle of the night. :)

It turns out that his "student" was pressing the mike button on his yoke when ever he wanted to talk. When pressed, both mikes were hot.
 
Oooh on an airpark, missed that detail. Turnabout is fairplay. You want to live on an airpark where any violation real or imagined will be spotted and reported? Good luck with that. And I'd imagine living on airpark one might know of others that might have something not kosher. Better to own your own airport or be anonymous at a public airport.
 
Ron Levy said:
If you don't like the law, get it changed. Unfortunately, that works both ways -- and aviation's enemies are more numerous than we are. That's why I am an AOPA member and contribute to AOPA PAC -- they can fight these battles for us effectively, as opposed to the pointlessness of ranting about rules on web sites like these.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough, I was on your side right up to post 33. There are no facts in evidence that AOPA has EVER taken a stand against an unregulated pilot operating in the NAS. I checked on that a few years back, and unless things have changed dramatically, they stay far, far away from this kind of individual responsibility stuff.

AOPA wouldn't touch this kind of infraction with a 10,000' pole. If the infractee contacted AOPA legal advice system, I'm confident they would advise him to turn himself in, and barring that, redirect the offender to an independent atty(which is what they typically do anyway). The exception is the case where the whole federal system comes down on a pilot like the DEA/TSA/DHS has been doing. for one guy, flying around with a student cert they just stick their fingers in their ears and go 'lalallalalalallaaa,,,, I can't heeeeeeeeeeaaaarrrrrr youuuuuuuuuuu.'

Back to the OPs predicament. The guy has no insurance and is flying out of a comm airport. If he crashes, the comm which the airport is on will be named, so if I were a paying member of that flying comm I would drop a dime in a second on this guy.
 
docmirror said:
Strangely enough, I was on your side right up to post 33. There are no facts in evidence that AOPA has EVER taken a stand against an unregulated pilot operating in the NAS. I checked on that a few years back, and unless things have changed dramatically, they stay far, far away from this kind of individual responsibility stuff.
Click to expand...
That is hardly what I was suggesting, but FWIW, AOPA was in the forefront of getting the Sport Pilot/LSA rules implemented, and those rules expanded the options for many folks to fly legally. As for your specific point, I agree that it's likely nobody from AOPA has ever stood up and said "We're against an unregulated pilot operating in the national airspace system", but I'm quite sure they have repeatedly spoken in clinics, meetings, and training sessions about how important it is to fly legally -- they even devote a column in AOPA Pilot to legal matters every month. So I think it is fair to say that if you asked an AOPA rep about this particular case, the one thing s/he would not say is "MYOB/live and let live."
 
Ron Levy said:
That is hardly what I was suggesting, but FWIW, AOPA was in the forefront of getting the Sport Pilot/LSA rules implemented, and those rules expanded the options for many folks to fly legally.
Click to expand...

Alrighty, what battle that you referred to are AOPA engaged in? I haven't seen anyone from AOPA raise their voice higher than a whisper since I've been a member. They have also not engaged in any legal maneuvering, lawsuit, or been a party to any lawsuit on either side of this unreg pilot issue.

Your insouciant mention of AOPA with regard to the issue in this thread is completely discordant. Now you are grasping with the LSA/SP stuff? You really think AOPA was out front with the program? That was not my recollection even remotely, and how it relates to a student pilot operating in the NAS, has me once again - baffled.
 
Last edited:
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top