View Single Post
  #2  
Old September 25th 03, 03:26 AM
Capt. Doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Badwater Bill wrote in message But, I remember reading something here
once about some letter that we need from the Feds in order to fly over
populated areas in EXPERIMENTAL category aircraft. What do you folks
know about that requirement?


I don't know much, but the operating limitations can be changed after flight
testing is successfully completed (ie: after the 40 hours is done).

Just the other day in Sitka Alaska some fed
demanded to ramp check a private airplane operating under part 91.
The owner was scared and confused and allowed the Fed inside of his
airplane. What do you people think of that?


I think that the owner was scared and confused.

I guess the Fed even
told the owner he was going to detain him if he didn't submit to the
ramp check. Interesting eh? Since when was a government puke from
the FAA able to legally hold an airplane back from a flight. Too much.
How many others of you have had this happen while operating under part
91? Anyone?


I'm not too smart, but I know enough to become invisible when I see the tie
and pocket protector. I see US Gov't license plates on a car and I'm gone.
Some of my friends have had the courage to stand up to them and deny
everything except a peek at their certificates. This works well most of the
time because most inspectors just want to check off the boxes on a form and
go for beer. However, there are a few rather tenacious inspectors with
little knowledge of NTSB case law who will try to ruin your life even if you
are polite and courteous. It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong- they
will still cause you headaches- guilty until proven innocent- isn't that how
executive law works?

Aviation law interests me for a couple of reasons. One reason is for the
protection of my livelyhood. Another is to point out when FAA inspectors are
wrong. For a good board, try this site:
'www.propilot.com' and click on Doc's FAR Forum.

D.