Trent Palmer (YouTuber Bush Pilot Channel) Suspended By FAA

It appears this one has boiled down to the point that no one is listening to what the other side is trying to say because nobody wants to be wrong, even when they have posted something stupid.
 
thito01 said:
It appears this one has boiled down to the point that no one is listening to what the other side is trying to say because nobody wants to be wrong, even when they have posted something stupid.
Click to expand...
What?
 
Tarheelpilot said:
And it is possible to be below 500agl on lazy eights. But it requires flying a slow airplane. Not normally an issue in commercial training.
Click to expand...

You mean 8's on pylons. But it doesn't even really require that slow of a plane, and I'd bet with the TAAs replacing Complex aircraft, the average plane used in Commercial training is getting slower. After all, there are a whole lot of 172s being used for Commercial training now.

Any airspeed/wind combination that produces a 75 kt GS on the upwind part of the maneuver requires <500 AGL.
 
RussR said:
You mean 8's on pylons. But it doesn't even really require that slow of a plane, and I'd bet with the TAAs replacing Complex aircraft, the average plane used in Commercial training is getting slower. After all, there are a whole lot of 172s being used for Commercial training now.

Any airspeed/wind combination that produces a 75 kt GS on the upwind part of the maneuver requires <500 AGL.
Click to expand...
Yeah. But it’s only a problem for people that don’t want to comply with the regulations. How about don’t fly a 172 for commercial training if you can’t legally use it for the maneuvers. That seems like a basic requirement of the airplane being used.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Yeah. But it’s only a problem for people that don’t want to comply with the regulations. How about don’t fly a 172 for commercial training if you can’t legally use it for the maneuvers. That seems like a basic requirement of the airplane being used.
Click to expand...
I flew my 172 for commercial training. And I've done low passes over fields on which I did not land.
 
EdFred said:
Nothing, but if there's a person hiding in ghillie suit, you're busted and can expect a 210 day suspension unless you fight it.
Click to expand...
Well, that explains the Cessna shot on short final last week. Pilot is lucky all he got was a hole in his plane. Will a certificate action be next? Depending on the caliber and deformation of the skin, that could be prima facie evidence the pilot was within 500 ft of the sniper.
 
EdFred said:
Nothing, but if there's a person hiding in ghillie suit, you're busted and can expect a 210 day suspension unless you fight it.
Click to expand...
What about a Catholic bear in a ghillie suit?
 
LesGawlik said:
Well, that explains the Cessna shot on short final last week. Pilot is lucky all he got was a hole in his plane. Will a certificate action be next? Depending on the caliber and deformation of the skin, that could be prima facie evidence the pilot was within 500 ft of the sniper.
Click to expand...
The scary thing to me is that for every shot that resulted in a hole in the skin of a plane, there must have been a whole bunch of shots that missed! :eek2:
 
I remember a podcast where a student pilot was told not to fly over a particular valley in the Appalachians below a certain altitude. He did not listen, and the next pilot who preflighted the aircraft found a bullet hole and a bullet rattling around in the wing. Apparently in that area, below a certain altitude the locals consider you to be a potential revenuer, and deal with you accordingly.
 
POA_Newbie said:
FOIA filed with the NTSB for the ALJ decision. I find it very unusual that he isn't releasing it on his own. I'll post it if it's a successful FOIA.
Click to expand...

My FOIA was denied.

From the NTSB.....

"Please note that this decision is a draft document, and therefore, we determined that it is exempt from release under FOIA exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) ("Exemption 5"), which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.”

Any suggestions?

I guess we will just have to wait for the NTSB full board appeal to see the whole story.
 
POA_Newbie said:
My FOIA was denied.

From the NTSB.....

"Please note that this decision is a draft document, and therefore, we determined that it is exempt from release under FOIA exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) ("Exemption 5"), which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.”

Any suggestions?

I guess we will just have to wait for the NTSB full board appeal to see the whole story.
Click to expand...

What a word salad way to say, "we run the show and the answer is, No!"
 
POA_Newbie said:
My FOIA was denied.

From the NTSB.....

"Please note that this decision is a draft document, and therefore, we determined that it is exempt from release under FOIA exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) ("Exemption 5"), which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.”

Any suggestions?

I guess we will just have to wait for the NTSB full board appeal to see the whole story.
Click to expand...

a5f9a11a03d8227df09742babd4a9a0e--the-fair-meme.jpg
 
POA_Newbie said:
My FOIA was denied.

From the NTSB.....

"Please note that this decision is a draft document, and therefore, we determined that it is exempt from release under FOIA exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) ("Exemption 5"), which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.”

Any suggestions?

I guess we will just have to wait for the NTSB full board appeal to see the whole story.
Click to expand...
What exactly did you request?
 
POA_Newbie said:
From the NTSB.....

"Please note that this decision is a draft document, and therefore, we determined that it is exempt from release under FOIA exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) ("Exemption 5"), which exempts from disclosure “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested.”
Click to expand...
That ties in with something I've noticed about published appeals to the full board. They always start out by referring to the ALJ ruling as an "initial decision."
 
Since the 5th Circuit said the SEC Administrative Law Judges were out of bounds in Enforcement Actions, this may be a real can of worms for the FAA.

“On May 18, 2022, the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion vacating a Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision that George Jarkesy, Jr. (“Jarkesy”) and his investment adviser Patriot28, L.L.C. (“Patriot28”) committed securities fraud. The Court, in an opinion authored by Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, held that “(1) the SEC’s in-house adjudication of Petitioners’ case violated their Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial; (2) Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the SEC by failing to provide an intelligible principle by which the SEC would exercise the delegated power, in violation of Article I’s vesting of “all” legislative power in Congress; and (3) statutory removal restrictions on SEC ALJs violate the Take Care Clause of Article II.” This decision could drastically affect the SEC’s use of in-house administrative judges to bring enforcement actions.“

Cheers
 
X3 Skier said:
Since the 5th Circuit said the SEC Administrative Law Judges were out of bounds in Enforcement Actions, this may be a real can of worms for the FAA.
Click to expand...

I saw that as well however the ruling narrowly applies to the SEC. Just about every federal agency people interact with has admin law courts that should be subject to the ruling, but aren’t.
 
The video evidence is not even admissible, which was the foundation of the faa bogus case to begin with.
This is more of a kangaroo court, with a few idiots who would like to think they are gods, than anything to do with the pilot breaking some rules.
Its really a shame that all involved on the government side won't be terminated for this, which would actually be justice.
 
X3 Skier said:
this may be a real can of worms for the FAA.
Click to expand...
FYI: The FAA system with the NTSB appeals system is different than other governments department ALJ systems and deals with certificates and their associated privileges. Plus there is a stated path to the US court system if one wishes to appeal the final NTSB decisions.
 
TCABM said:
I saw that as well however the ruling narrowly applies to the SEC. Just about every federal agency people interact with has admin law courts that should be subject to the ruling, but aren’t.
Click to expand...

Bell206 said:
FYI: The FAA system with the NTSB appeals system is different than other governments department ALJ systems and deals with certificates and their associated privileges. Plus there is a stated path to the US court system if one wishes to appeal the final NTSB decisions.
Click to expand...

Since seemingly anybody can sue anybody for anything, I wonder how long before some enterprising lawyer attempt to extend this to other ALJ Systems. Likely to lose but stranger things have happened.

Cheers
 
Agreed. But the ruling would be persuasive authority for every other agency where the agency is judge, jury and executioner, in addition to cop, grand jury and prosecutor.

I could not distinguish the SEC enforcement actions from FAA enforcement actions.
 
LesGawlik said:
could not distinguish the SEC enforcement actions from FAA enforcement actions.
Click to expand...
Its my understanding the investigative and enforcement responsibilities of the FAA are codified differently than other government departments and give the FAA administrator legal authority to enforce certain US laws and regulations. This authority and responsibility is stated in several documents such as Part 13 and Order 2150. I believe it is also the reason there is a different appeal route in the FAA system with the NTSB providing 2 levels of enforcement appeal before a case gets to the US court system.
 
Lindberg said:
What exactly did you request?
Click to expand...

"I would like to request the initial decision document by the Administrative Law Judge that conducted the formal hearing for Trent Palmer. This case was heard before the ALJ in 2022."

I have had a few emails with the NTSB FOIA representative. It seems draft is the key word. If the final was available that could be included in the FOIA. Although, she seems to think I won't need a FOIA request to get the final. I'll update the thread.
 
Grum.Man said:
Not sure if this has been posted yet but here is part of the video evidence. I realize it could be sped up, perspective off, etc but I can certainly see the FAA's point given the houses he was pointed right at.

https://www.flyingmag.com/does-trent-palmer-deserve-a-suspension/
Click to expand...

I look at that video and I see someone being an ahole, buzzing someone's house. Whoever videoed it knew he was coming which means he did it at least one other time. But I think about what it would take for me to video something like that and that level would be 2 or 3 previous passes.

Take your medicine Trent, you earned it.
 
PaulS said:
I look at that video and I see someone being an ahole, buzzing someone's house. Whoever videoed it knew he was coming which means he did it at least one other time. But I think about what it would take for me to video something like that and that level would be 2 or 3 previous passes.

Take your medicine Trent, you earned it.
Click to expand...

That's a cell phone video from a ring (or similar) camera. They (ring cameras) are always recording. No prior knowledge needed. Just like my dashcam. I don't know captain dickbag is going to pull some stupid move in front of me, it's always recording.
 
Part of the article:

However, in its response to FLYING’s request for copies of the video the FAA noted, “We are withholding another video under Exemption 6 of the FOIA. Exemption 6 of the FOIA protects information that pertains to an individual “the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,” (e.g., names, dates of birth, social security numbers, home addresses, and telephone numbers of parties mentioned). When applying Exemption 6, the FAA weighs the privacy interest of an individual against any public interest in the records. In this case, the identity of a woman and an infant.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top