Gary Drescher wrote:
"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:_Qpof.17301$Jz6.14963@trnddc06...

Bob Gardner wrote:


Gary, the most recent case was in 2005. That's what George was linking
to.

No, that's the date of the article. The most recent ruling on the forecast
icing issue was about 12 years ago. There were earlier ones as well. If,
however, the AIM is in conflict with case law (and it is), the AIM is
wrong.


The AIM presents the FAA's current official definition of "known icing
conditions". So any case law decided on the basis of prior explicit or
implicit definitions is no longer applicable.

But isn't it the NTSB that usually makes the final determination on the
appeal?

Matt