 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lanny Fetterman
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Catawissa Pa.
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:31 pm Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
 |
|
I asked the gentleman about this when he did my inspection. He said that
the FAA was too busy to hunt you down and weigh you, however, you better
not screw up to the point that they are called in to investigate something
you do. That`s when the poop will hit the whirling. blades. Lanny
N598LF Do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Lanny Fetterman Firestar II N598LF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Thom Riddle
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:49 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
A couple months ago when I attended an FAA sponsored safety seminar, I
had the opportunity to talk to an FAA guy from the Rochester, NY FSDO
after the program. We got to talking about enforcement actions and just
what the FAA could and could not do legally. I broached this subject
with him because during his presentation he related a story about a guy
who was flying an airplane that the IA doing the annual inspection
would not return it to service because it was unsafe and the owner
would not let him do the necessary fixes. The bottom line from this
particular FAA guy is that virtually all enforcement actions are
against pilots, not aircraft. Eventually, he asked me if I knew
anything about ULs and I said a bit. He said that this was one area the
the FAA was unable to do anything UNLESS the pilot is certificated. If
he/she has a pilot's certificate of any level issued by the FAA then
they can sanction him by suspending or revoking his certificate for any
FAR infraction. Once it is revoked the FAA can do nothing else. So if
an "undocumented" "pilot" continues to fly his aircraft or vehicle,
they have no remedy because their only authority is over flyers with
certificates. Like driving a car without a license, they can't take it
away but once. But the local courts can put you in jail for continued
driving without a license. What can the local courts or FAA do about
continued flying without a certificate??? That was going to be my next
question for the FAA guy but he had to leave, so I never got an answer.
I'm relating this because it is an interesting subject not because I
condone flying illegally, which I don't. I've been ramp checked once
(about three years ago) since getting my private certificate 40 years
ago. The FAA inspector was interested in the Cherokee 140's
documentation, not mine. Fortunately, all documents were in compliance
though he never asked to see my pilot or medical certificates.
Thom in Buffalo
do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)
Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arty Trost
Joined: 25 May 2006
Posts: 206
Location: Sandy, Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:07 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
I'm glad to see that some of us "fess up" and admit
that although we've never been caught, we're flying
illegally. (Pretending to be a legal Part 103
ultralight even though our aircraft doesn't meet the
parameters. ) In spite of Dana's post:
"I wonder about the plane that's otherwise legal but
has a few extra coats of paint, or wheel brakes, or
instruments, or whatever, that push the weigh up to
255 lbs or 260 or 270 or so..."
well - there's just no such thing as "otherwise
legal". It's either legal (LESS than 254 lbs., 5 gal.
gas, etc.) or it's not.
The real question is whether you're willing to take
the risk of getting caught. Most folks have been
flying for years taking that risk and will probably
continue to do so, especially single-seaters. Lots of
posters have pointed out that the FAA has paid darn
little attention to "fat" ultralights in the past -
and everyone has a different opinion as to whether
they'll begin paying more attention in the future, now
that Sport Pilot is available.
Thom (see post below) is incorrect - or perhaps I
should say the FAA guy he quotes is incorrect. The
FAA has "fining" power - as the current issue of Light
Sport and Ultralight Flying points out, (Jan. 2007
issue, p. 14) "After this date [Jan. 31, 2008] you
will be the owner of an aircraft that is not licensed,
has no airworthiness certificate, and is being
operated by a person who is not licenses as a pilot.
Each infraction can carry a fine of up to $10,000
($30,000) per occurance, and the aircraft will be
confiscated."
Actually - folks flying "fat" ultralights (or should
we call it like it is and say "unlicensed experimental
aircraft" ) don't have to wait until 1-31-2008 to fit
that definition - they fit it right now! Folks HAVE
been fined - I personally know of one such person (a
$10,000 fine which was reduced to $4000) and have
heard about more - but apparently there's not many who
have been fined compared to the number of folks flying
illegally. I also personally know of one BFI (flying
a 2-seater with current exemptions) who had the FAA
meet him upon landing at a public (non-towered)
airport because a private pilot who disliked
ultralights had called in a complaint. Luckily,
everything was legit so the FAA left but after
checking out out all his placards and paperwork.
Because I like to do multi-week, multi-state
cross-country flights, I decided to jump through the
hoops of Sport Pilot even though I fly a
single-seater. I just wasn't willing to continue to
take the risk.
To me it boils down to a personal decision whether we
think the risk of getting caught will increase and if
we're willing to take that risk.
Arty
--- Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
<jtriddle(at)adelphia.net>
A couple months ago when I attended an FAA sponsored
safety seminar, I
had the opportunity to talk to an FAA guy from the
Rochester, NY FSDO
after the program. We got to talking about
enforcement actions and just
what the FAA could and could not do legally. I
broached this subject
with him because during his presentation he related
a story about a guy
who was flying an airplane that the IA doing the
annual inspection
would not return it to service because it was unsafe
and the owner
would not let him do the necessary fixes. The bottom
line from this
particular FAA guy is that virtually all enforcement
actions are
against pilots, not aircraft. Eventually, he asked
me if I knew
anything about ULs and I said a bit. He said that
this was one area the
the FAA was unable to do anything UNLESS the pilot
is certificated. If
he/she has a pilot's certificate of any level issued
by the FAA then
they can sanction him by suspending or revoking his
certificate for any
FAR infraction. Once it is revoked the FAA can do
nothing else. So if
an "undocumented" "pilot" continues to fly his
aircraft or vehicle,
they have no remedy because their only authority is
over flyers with
certificates. Like driving a car without a license,
they can't take it
away but once. But the local courts can put you in
jail for continued
driving without a license. What can the local courts
or FAA do about
continued flying without a certificate??? That was
going to be my next
question for the FAA guy but he had to leave, so I
never got an answer.
I'm relating this because it is an interesting
subject not because I
condone flying illegally, which I don't. I've been
ramp checked once
(about three years ago) since getting my private
certificate 40 years
ago. The FAA inspector was interested in the
Cherokee 140's
documentation, not mine. Fortunately, all documents
were in compliance
though he never asked to see my pilot or medical
certificates.
Thom in Buffalo
do not archive
browse
Subscriptions page,
FAQ,
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
Web Forums!
|
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David.Lehman
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 265
Location: "Lovely" Fresno CA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:10 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
Thom...
The FAA will do a civil penalty enforcement action when there is no certificate involved... They also use the civil penalty process when they determine the violation is not egregious enough to warrant removal of a certificate, i.e., shut down United Airlines...
DVD
do not archive
On 12/28/06, Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net (jtriddle(at)adelphia.net)> wrote: [quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net (jtriddle(at)adelphia.net)>
A couple months ago when I attended an FAA sponsored safety seminar, I
had the opportunity to talk to an FAA guy from the Rochester, NY FSDO
after the program. We got to talking about enforcement actions and just
what the FAA could and could not do legally. I broached this subject
with him because during his presentation he related a story about a guy
who was flying an airplane that the IA doing the annual inspection
would not return it to service because it was unsafe and the owner
would not let him do the necessary fixes. The bottom line from this
particular FAA guy is that virtually all enforcement actions are
against pilots, not aircraft. Eventually, he asked me if I knew
anything about ULs and I said a bit. He said that this was one area the
the FAA was unable to do anything UNLESS the pilot is certificated. If
he/she has a pilot's certificate of any level issued by the FAA then
they can sanction him by suspending or revoking his certificate for any
FAR infraction. Once it is revoked the FAA can do nothing else. So if
an "undocumented" "pilot" continues to fly his aircraft or vehicle,
they have no remedy because their only authority is over flyers with
certificates. Like driving a car without a license, they can't take it
away but once. But the local courts can put you in jail for continued
driving without a license. What can the local courts or FAA do about
continued flying without a certificate??? That was going to be my next
question for the FAA guy but he had to leave, so I never got an answer.
I'm relating this because it is an interesting subject not because I
condone flying illegally, which I don't. I've been ramp checked once
(about three years ago) since getting my private certificate 40 years
ago. The FAA inspector was interested in the Cherokee 140's
documentation, not mine. Fortunately, all documents were in compliance
though he never asked to see my pilot or medical certificates.
Thom in Buffalo
do not archive
[b]
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
ô¿ô
"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to the society. The optimist invents the aeroplane, the pessimist the parachute."
--- George Bernard Shaw |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jim
Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 107
Location: N. Idaho
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
herbgh
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 145
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:51 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
Guys
I would like to observe that the part 103 program has likely been
successful beyond the wildest dreams of the FAA.. They have used the same
principle as the IRS. FEAR!! Same thing the Political parties are using
now!! Ranks right up there with the other much "focus grouped"
emotions--Love and Hate!!
Wonder if anyone with the FAA flies a legal pt 103? 
They knew at the beginning that we would add goodies to our
machines--bigger engines--extra gas--extra paint etc.. Be overweight from
the start!!
after all---this is "merica---home of the free and the brave and the
God given right to be stupid!! Flying over populated areas is
something we do without thinking these days.. So--that little bit
of fear in the backs of our minds has generally prevented us from going
way overboard..sort of a managed/self policed anarchy of the mind!!
Just what they wanted IMHO! The FAA has a few real A__ Holes amongst
largely decent folks.. Just as smart or smarter than you and I...
Now--if they increased the wt to 330 or so... what would happen??
You guessed it! Joe schmoe would add a hundred pounds of chrome to his
!! Install an 0200 continental ,, etc... Cleveland Brakes!! Tundra
tires!! You know JOE don't you..?? He is the guy who bought the
leathers and the Harley last month.. Month before that he had the 10 gal
hat and oiled wind breaker and the horse and trailer.. This month it is
flying... Fake bullett holes, catchy name on the nose.. etc.. Herb
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:06:03 -0800 (PST) TheWanderingWench
<thewanderingwench(at)yahoo.com> writes:
| Quote: |
<thewanderingwench(at)yahoo.com>
I'm glad to see that some of us "fess up" and admit
that although we've never been caught, we're flying
illegally. (Pretending to be a legal Part 103
ultralight even though our aircraft doesn't meet the
parameters. ) In spite of Dana's post:
"I wonder about the plane that's otherwise legal but
has a few extra coats of paint, or wheel brakes, or
instruments, or whatever, that push the weigh up to
255 lbs or 260 or 270 or so..."
well - there's just no such thing as "otherwise
legal". It's either legal (LESS than 254 lbs., 5 gal.
gas, etc.) or it's not.
The real question is whether you're willing to take
the risk of getting caught. Most folks have been
flying for years taking that risk and will probably
continue to do so, especially single-seaters. Lots of
posters have pointed out that the FAA has paid darn
little attention to "fat" ultralights in the past -
and everyone has a different opinion as to whether
they'll begin paying more attention in the future, now
that Sport Pilot is available.
Thom (see post below) is incorrect - or perhaps I
should say the FAA guy he quotes is incorrect. The
FAA has "fining" power - as the current issue of Light
Sport and Ultralight Flying points out, (Jan. 2007
issue, p. 14) "After this date [Jan. 31, 2008] you
will be the owner of an aircraft that is not licensed,
has no airworthiness certificate, and is being
operated by a person who is not licenses as a pilot.
Each infraction can carry a fine of up to $10,000
($30,000) per occurance, and the aircraft will be
confiscated."
Actually - folks flying "fat" ultralights (or should
we call it like it is and say "unlicensed experimental
aircraft" ) don't have to wait until 1-31-2008 to fit
that definition - they fit it right now! Folks HAVE
been fined - I personally know of one such person (a
$10,000 fine which was reduced to $4000) and have
heard about more - but apparently there's not many who
have been fined compared to the number of folks flying
illegally. I also personally know of one BFI (flying
a 2-seater with current exemptions) who had the FAA
meet him upon landing at a public (non-towered)
airport because a private pilot who disliked
ultralights had called in a complaint. Luckily,
everything was legit so the FAA left but after
checking out out all his placards and paperwork.
Because I like to do multi-week, multi-state
cross-country flights, I decided to jump through the
hoops of Sport Pilot even though I fly a
single-seater. I just wasn't willing to continue to
take the risk.
To me it boils down to a personal decision whether we
think the risk of getting caught will increase and if
we're willing to take that risk.
Arty
--- Thom Riddle <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> <jtriddle(at)adelphia.net>
>
> A couple months ago when I attended an FAA sponsored
> safety seminar, I
> had the opportunity to talk to an FAA guy from the
> Rochester, NY FSDO
> after the program. We got to talking about
> enforcement actions and just
> what the FAA could and could not do legally. I
> broached this subject
> with him because during his presentation he related
> a story about a guy
> who was flying an airplane that the IA doing the
> annual inspection
> would not return it to service because it was unsafe
> and the owner
> would not let him do the necessary fixes. The bottom
> line from this
> particular FAA guy is that virtually all enforcement
> actions are
> against pilots, not aircraft. Eventually, he asked
> me if I knew
> anything about ULs and I said a bit. He said that
> this was one area the
> the FAA was unable to do anything UNLESS the pilot
> is certificated. If
> he/she has a pilot's certificate of any level issued
> by the FAA then
> they can sanction him by suspending or revoking his
> certificate for any
> FAR infraction. Once it is revoked the FAA can do
> nothing else. So if
> an "undocumented" "pilot" continues to fly his
> aircraft or vehicle,
> they have no remedy because their only authority is
> over flyers with
> certificates. Like driving a car without a license,
> they can't take it
> away but once. But the local courts can put you in
> jail for continued
> driving without a license. What can the local courts
> or FAA do about
> continued flying without a certificate??? That was
> going to be my next
> question for the FAA guy but he had to leave, so I
> never got an answer.
>
> I'm relating this because it is an interesting
> subject not because I
> condone flying illegally, which I don't. I've been
> ramp checked once
> (about three years ago) since getting my private
> certificate 40 years
> ago. The FAA inspector was interested in the
> Cherokee 140's
> documentation, not mine. Fortunately, all documents
> were in compliance
> though he never asked to see my pilot or medical
> certificates.
>
> Thom in Buffalo
> do not archive
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
>
>
>
www.LessonsFromTheEdge.com
"Life's a daring adventure or nothing"
Helen Keller
"I refuse to tip toe through life just to arrive safely at death."
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:54 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
He said that the FAA was too busy to hunt you down and weigh you,>>
Hi,
that is another plus that you enjoy by not having a certified plane. There
is no such animal on this side of the pond. Except maybe powered chutes, I
don`t know. Here there will be an annual issue of a permit to fly subject
to a check over by an inspector and every five years when your plane is
checked for its annual IT WILL BE WEIGHED.
All planes get heavier. They grow extra instruments, spats, hand held radios
change into fixtures, the GPS moves up a size, strobes get installed. Every
year if the plane is a bit close to the weight limit there is a frantic
unscrewing of things and removals of any extraneous bits and pieces to get
through the check.
There is hope that we will get a derugulated class, but I cannot see the
authorities loosening the strings to the extent of not having an annual
inspection.
Cheers
Pat.
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d-m-hague(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:01 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
At 11:06 AM 12/28/2006, TheWanderingWench wrote:
| Quote: | ...In spite of Dana's post:
"I wonder about the plane that's otherwise legal but
has a few extra coats of paint, or wheel brakes, or
instruments, or whatever, that push the weigh up to
255 lbs or 260 or 270 or so..."
well - there's just no such thing as "otherwise
legal". It's either legal (LESS than 254 lbs., 5 gal.
gas, etc.) or it's not.
|
What I meant is an aircraft that would be legal if it wasn't overweight,
i.e. no extra seat, big tank, etc... but I think you knew that.
-Dana
--
--
A rolling stone .... kills worms
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d-m-hague(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:04 am Post subject: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
At 09:47 AM 12/28/2006, Thom Riddle wrote:
| Quote: | ... If he/she has a pilot's certificate of any level issued by the FAA
then they can sanction him by suspending or revoking his certificate for
any FAR infraction. Once it is revoked the FAA can do nothing else. So if
an "undocumented" "pilot" continues to fly his aircraft or vehicle, they
have no remedy...
|
Thom, that's not correct. The FAA can and will impose a civil penalty (can
be in the thousands of dollars) for each violation, regardless of whether
the pilot has a valid airman certificate or not. If the pilot IS licensed,
they may offer the option of a fine OR a suspension.
-Dana
--
--
A rolling stone .... kills worms
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thom Riddle
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:37 pm Post subject: Re: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
Arty, Dana and others:
Thanks for the information about the FAA's ability and willingness to issue civil fines. I was not able to get anymore information from this particular FAA guy and it is possible he did not even know that himself.
Thom in Buffalo
do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)
Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thom Riddle
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1597
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA (9G0)
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:52 pm Post subject: Re: 103 and slightly overweight |
|
|
For those who have not read the referenced articles that were used to apply the civil penalties to the un-registered Cessna owner, there is a sub-paragraph within 49 U.S.C. § 46306(b)(5)(A) that allows the undocumented "pilot" to be charged as well, not just the owner of an undocumented flying machine. Specifically....
(7) knowingly and willfully serves or attempts to serve in any
capacity as an airman without an airman's certificate authorizing
the individual to serve in that capacity;
Thom in Buffalo
do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY (9G0)
Don't worry about old age... it doesn't last very long.
- Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
