![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:41:49 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote in : But there is always 103.9(a) "Hazardous operations", which is rather subjective. Then I suspect it's a matter of the facts of the case and the persuasiveness of the arguments the opposing lawyers make to the judge. If it's an FAA administrative action, the "pilot" won't be afforded the benefit of a judge, unfortunately. And because Part 103 operators needn't hold an airmans certificate, he wouldn't be grounded (I wouldn't think), but the FAA could impose a fine, I suppose. If the Sheriff files civil charges against him, it would seem that the DA would have to prove there was a hazard. Lacking any evidence of injury or damage, that may be difficult for the DA to prove. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stupid Pilot Tricks? | Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe | Rotorcraft | 2 | May 8th 07 04:00 AM |
Stupid Pilot Tricks - Insurance Co. Trying to Back Out | Bob Chilcoat | Piloting | 54 | October 8th 04 10:15 AM |
Stupid pilot tricks | Bob Chilcoat | Piloting | 20 | September 18th 04 06:44 PM |
More Stupid Govenment Tricks | john smith | Piloting | 8 | September 2nd 04 04:35 AM |
Stupid Pilot Tricks | David Dyer-Bennet | Piloting | 3 | October 19th 03 12:22 AM |