Why are ramp checks allowed when random traffic stops are not?

Lachlan said:
We appreciate you being able to admit you were wrong. :)
Click to expand...

This subject has been beaten to death on this forum. People still can’t figure out how to use the search function, and many more would rather debate OWT and internet myths rather than look for actual information.

In 4+ decades of aviation I’ve never had a Part 91 ramp inspection, only 1 flying part 135 and probably 4 or 5 flying 121.

In the age of reduced staffing at the FAA, part 91 ramp checks are getting far and few, unless they are investigating a complaint.
 
Doc Holliday said:
This subject has been beaten to death on this forum. People still can’t figure out how to use the search function, and many more would rather debate OWT and internet myths rather than look for actual information.

In 4+ decades of aviation I’ve never had a Part 91 ramp inspection, only 1 flying part 135 and probably 4 or 5 flying 121.

In the age of reduced staffing at the FAA, part 91 ramp checks are getting far and few, unless they are investigating a complaint.
Click to expand...
Whatsa 121 ramp check go like? Seems odd they'd do them. I'd think they had different ways to keep tabs on the 121 crowd. Do they get up kinda close and start sniffing?:fingerwag:
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
Whatsa 121 ramp check go like? Seems odd they'd do them. I'd think they had different ways to keep tabs on the 121 crowd. Do they get up kinda close and start sniffing?
Click to expand...

Very routine. Check certificates aircraft logbook, any MEL’s open and look to see others were properly closed, basic walk around.

Typically very professional. Look at it as a check and balance system, the ramp is surveillance to check that procedures are being followed by the carrier.
 
luvflyin said:
Whatsa 121 ramp check go like? Seems odd they'd do them. I'd think they had different ways to keep tabs on the 121 crowd. Do they get up kinda close and start sniffing?
Click to expand...
“Can I see the logbooks and your license and medical?”

“Ok, you’re good”

That’s been my experience. I’ve had a few feds in the jumpseat and it was a non issue.
 
bflynn said:
Commercial transport vs private. The DOT cannot roll up on a private citizen in a car and demand the same.
Click to expand...
Commercial vs private has nothing to do with it. Its the class of vehicle in question. Anyone with a spare $200k can buy themselves a new class 8 peterbilt and a 53' trailer and simply put NOT FOR HIRE on the side and drive it as a private personal vehicle. But you would still be subject to the same random roadside inspections even though no commercial transport was taking place.
 
Doc Holliday said:
This subject has been beaten to death on this forum. People still can’t figure out how to use the search function, and many more would rather debate OWT and internet myths rather than look for actual information.

In 4+ decades of aviation I’ve never had a Part 91 ramp inspection, only 1 flying part 135 and probably 4 or 5 flying 121.

In the age of reduced staffing at the FAA, part 91 ramp checks are getting far and few, unless they are investigating a complaint.
Click to expand...

Good points. I don’t see the big deal about the evil FAA. Follow the rules, have a great time. Be a violator, suffer for it if you get caught.
 
Lachlan said:
Good points. I don’t see the big deal about the evil FAA. Follow the rules, have a great time. Be a violator, suffer for it if you get caught.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The FAA doesn't have the budget to be evil; they can barely afford to keep their towers staffed, and as we now know, couldn't afford to provide any serious oversight during Boeing's development of the 737 MAX.
 
David Megginson said:
Exactly. The FAA doesn't have the budget to be evil; they can barely afford to keep their towers staffed, and as we now know, couldn't afford to provide any serious oversight during Boeing's development of the 737 MAX.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t cost a penny to be evil.
 
Sport pilots at one time were required to carry logbooks but the rule was changed (February 1st 2010):

(3) A sport pilot must carry his or her logbook or other evidence of required authorized instructor endorsements on all flights. (emphasis added)
 
I have been ramp checked twice. The first time I was not around and got a letter stating I needed to renew my aircraft registration. The second time was a nice summer day. Politely they asked for certs. Have a nice conversation all was good.
 
flyingron said:
There's a difference. A traffic STOP involves stopping someone that is moving. What is permitted is coming up to someone who is already stopped for some reason and making inquiries. This is called a consensual stop under the law and permitted.
Click to expand...

Only half true on the scenario you described. Absent reasonable suspicion (Terry v Ohio) or probable cause, that person is free to leave without saying anything. There will be no penalty for doing so. I’d imagine if the pilot leaves, there would be repercussions from the FAA? Or am I wrong?
 
sarangan said:
My theory is that police cars are always running your plates. If anything shows up, they can stop you. My wife was stopped one time for an expired driver's license. She didn't know it had expired. But the officer somehow did. How they made the connection between the plate number and who might be driving the car is a mystery to me.
Click to expand...

Haven’t read all the replies (so I might be duplicating something)…

In my state (and many others I believe), plate checks show the registered owner(s). Many also show the DL number of the registered owner(s). Fairly easy to check from there to learn of license suspension, warrants, etc.

Some states (mine included) do require that if the stop is for information gleaned from these checks, the driver has to at least be similar in appearance to the owner in question. IOW, if police check a plate and learn that the male RO has a suspended license, warrants, etc, but it’s obviously a female driver, they couldn’t stop it based solely on that information. If there is an independent traffic violation (speed, expired vehicle license, etc) then it’s irrelevant.
 
Omalley1537 said:
Only half true on the scenario you described. Absent reasonable suspicion (Terry v Ohio) or probable cause, that person is free to leave without saying anything. There will be no penalty for doing so. I’d imagine if the pilot leaves, there would be repercussions from the FAA? Or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

If the FSDO dudes suspect something that relates to this and they go up and start grilling the pilot I’d just say those are some brave FSDO dudes.
 
I've been ramped checked once, about 12 years ago. I was starting to refuel after a flight and he came up to me. I asked him to wait until I was done fueling and he did. It was no big deal.

Since then, that same FAA employee has been very active in participating in our local pilot safety meetings (he is not a pilot), and has "walked the walk" in making the the FAA an active proponent for improving pilot safety in our area.

I've also been on a boat that was boarded buy the USCG on intercoastal waters, and that same boat was boarded by New Jersey Marine Police not 48 hours later. Those interactions were far more intrusive, despite having having nothing at all illicit or suspicious about our boating activities.
 
Omalley1537 said:
Only half true on the scenario you described. Absent reasonable suspicion (Terry v Ohio) or probable cause, that person is free to leave without saying anything. There will be no penalty for doing so. I’d imagine if the pilot leaves, there would be repercussions from the FAA? Or am I wrong?
Click to expand...

That’s a “depends” type question.

If just a routine ramp inspection, and the pilot says “sorry, I’m running late and I have to go” probably nothing from there.

If the ramp is being done from a complaint, and the pilot leaves, then the FAA will send the pilot a letter of investigation and request a date and time to examine whatever it is they want to see.
 
Doc Holliday said:
That’s a “depends” type question.

If just a routine ramp inspection, and the pilot says “sorry, I’m running late and I have to go” probably nothing from there.

If the ramp is being done from a complaint, and the pilot leaves, then the FAA will send the pilot a letter of investigation and request a date and time to examine whatever it is they want to see.
Click to expand...

Thanks and makes sense. It would be logical that contact while investigating a specific complaint would give greater standing than a proactive contact.
 
luvflyin said:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

If the FSDO dudes suspect something that relates to this and they go up and start grilling the pilot I’d just say those are some brave FSDO dudes.
Click to expand...

Agreed and I realized I wasn’t specific enough in my post. I was describing traffic stops/street contacts by civilian law enforcement, not ramp checks.
 
David Megginson said:
Exactly. The FAA doesn't have the budget to be evil; they can barely afford to keep their towers staffed, and as we now know, couldn't afford to provide any serious oversight during Boeing's development of the 737 MAX.
Click to expand...
The only department in the FAA that seems to have unlimited funding is the one on Oklahoma city.
 
Terry doesn't apply here. Again, talking to you on the ramp, provided they do not impede your departure, is what is called a consensual stop and there's not any Constitutional restriction about it. It's only if they prevent you from going about your way that requires them to have some justification for detaining you.
 
flyingron said:
Terry doesn't apply here. Again, talking to you on the ramp, provided they do not impede your departure, is what is called a consensual stop and there's not any Constitutional restriction about it. It's only if they prevent you from going about your way that requires them to have some justification for detaining you.
Click to expand...

My apologies, I thought your original post was referencing traffic stops and social contacts in the “normal” world as opposed to aviation ops.

And yes, even away from aviation, contact can be made or attempted without any cause on someone who is not driving and in somewhere the police have lawful authority to be…but a person is free to leave unless reasonable suspicion or probable cause exists.

Carry on :D
 
Doc Holliday said:
So where did you find they had an unlimited budget? Serious question, I'd like to read about it.
Click to expand...
Oh God dude, don't you have anything better to do. If you read the original post that set you off it says seems to. Lighten up Francis.
 
Joe_B1 said:
Oh God dude, don't you have anything better to do. If you read the original post that set you off it says seems to. Lighten up Francis.
Click to expand...

OK, sorry.

I was just curious about what you stated. So we can assume your post was hyperbole.

Thanks.
 
Doc Holliday said:
OK, sorry.

I was just curious about what you stated. So we can assume your post was hyperbole.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was it, that is why I said "it seems like" which would imply that they tend to dog people with minor medical issues.

Just to give you a little background, I had a kidney stone when I was 18. It was due to some medication I was on at the time that caused that sort of thing. I am 63 now and have not had a kidney stone since. 45 years and they were still dogging me until I went basic med. I met the CACI guidelines decades ago yet every time I went for my 3rd class, the doc would sign me off and I would geta letter from OKC saying I could not fly until... tests, proof, bullcrap! Now you know why I posted that.
 
bflynn said:
So you agree a private citizen in a car isn’t valid.
Click to expand...
I agree that DOT being able to approach and inspect trucks at random has to do with the class of the vehicle and has nothing to do with whether or not the vehicle is engaged in commercial operations. I have not said I agree to anything else.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I have not said I agree to anything else.
Click to expand...

Whatever. It costs you nothing to agree with something that is true. The fact that you're stubborn makes me question the rest of everything you've said.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Sorry you feel bad.




OK, we're getting somewhere! So has 49USC 44709 been challenged? Or do we as citizens get to pick and choose which laws we will follow?
Click to expand...
Non-citizens certainly do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top