how illegal am I?

"Icebound" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Icebound" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Icebound" wrote in message
...

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. com...


Nor does it matter if the plane was built before ARROW (whatever
that
means). He was wrong on all counts.



ARROW are the current on-board-document rules:

No, it is now AROW and has been since 1996.



Yes, it is AROW for USA domestic flights, because the FCC has chosen
not
to
enforce Station Licenses nor Operators Licenses within the USA.

But they cannot extend such a waiver beyond their own borders and must
comply with the International agreements, so it is still ARROW
(officially)
for cross-border flights.

Technically, it is only ARROW for cross-border flights *into* the US.
Canada, most Caribbean countries, and Mexico no longer require radio
licenses. Even so, you could technically get around ARROW by simply
turning
off your radio when crossing the border. Once on the other side of the
border, you are safe in turning it back on. :-)



That is not correct.

Canada does not require a station license within its borders, just as the
USA does not within its borders. But the Canadian rule only affects
Canadians in Canada, not Canadians flying abroad, nor foreign nationals
flying into Canada.

The same applies for the USA rule... it only applies to US nationals
within
the USA.

But any Canadian-registered flight from Canada to the USA (or any other
country) requires a license under Canadian (and International) rules, just
as any US-registered flight from the US to Canada (or any other country)
requires a license under USA (and International) rules.

Canada and the USA were trying to negotiate a reciprocal agreement to
avoid
that requirement, but based on the last announcement that I saw, it was
never signed, and the official position remains that the license is
required.

The license requirement does not necessarily have anything to do with the
wishes of the individual countries; It is an international requirement
for
International flights. And until the two countries get their act together
and sign the agreement, they are supposed to abide by the international
agreement...ie: a station license *is* required.

Now, having said that, whether they choose to actually *enforce* the rule
is
another issue. However, Canadians have been warned by their Radio
authority
that their station license paperwork should be up-to-date upon entering
the
USA... because of the rule, but also in part because of 9/11 and the extra
level of ID that the license will provide.

Certainly a radio station license is a guaranteed way to stop terrorism.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Icebound" wrote in message
...

2. What *is* enforced by a ramp check?

....snip...
Anything that an inspector might be able to observe at that particular
moment is fair game, provided there's a regulation that applies. For
example, if an aircraft is observed landing in IFR conditions, an
inspector might ask to verify the pilot's instrument rating.

....but you are saying that it would not be fair game for the inspector to
ask them to prove on the spot, that they are below max-gross and within CofG
limits, even if he saw four 220-pound adults and a Newfoundland dog stuffing
150 pounds of gear and 38 gallons of fuel into that same C-172M on its way
out...is that right??? You are stating that they would be allowed to depart
if they want to...would schedule a meeting at a later date... would bring
their w&b information for that particular aircraft and load configuration
for that trip to the meeting... and try to prove their legality there???...
or how would that work?

"Icebound" wrote in message
...
...but you are saying that it would not be fair game for the inspector to
ask them to prove on the spot, that they are below max-gross and within
CofG limits, even if he saw four 220-pound adults and a Newfoundland dog
stuffing 150 pounds of gear and 38 gallons of fuel into that same C-172M
on its way out...is that right??? You are stating that they would be
allowed to depart if they want to.

Why do you think I am saying that? You wouldn't need W&B documentation to
know the plane was overloaded in your example.

If you'd like to try a more "borderline" example, where the inspector could
not tell through direct observation that the airplane was overloaded, then
the answer would be yes, they would be allowed to depart if they want to,
and no they don't need to prove that they are within the W&B limits to the
inspector. (Obviously, in the case where the W&B is required to be there,
as part of the AFM now required, the above does not hold).

Pete

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:32:25 -0500, "Icebound"
wrote:

But any Canadian-registered flight from Canada to the USA (or any other
country) requires a license under Canadian (and International) rules, just
as any US-registered flight from the US to Canada (or any other country)
requires a license under USA (and International) rules.

But nobody can enforce the rule, right? The American pilot hasn't
violated any Americans regs until he crosses the border into Canada,
and as soon as he returns to the U.S. he isn't in violation any
longer. And the Canadian regs as you say don't apply to Americans.

Seems to me that the only rules he has violated are the international
ones, and until the UN black helicopters complete their takeover of
Washington, who will enforce them?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

Icebound wrote:


Well okay... if the "true AFM" must be maintained for my particular
aircraft, it should contain the weight and balance information "for my
particular aircraft". And since the FARs (91.9 b ) say that the AFM must be
in the aircraft, then the W in ARROW (W-eight and Balance information) must
be in the aircraft.

I guess I still don't understand why you said in your earlier post that it
does not?


Because I never said that. I said that there's no distinct requirement
for W so it really is STUPID in the mnemonic. Further, NOT all aircraft
(especially ones built before the seventies) have (or are required to have)
AFM.

Icebound wrote:


But since the AFM is required to be in the aircraft by FARs 91.9 b, I still
don't see why people are saying that W&B info does not have to be in the
aircraft???

Because there might not be an AFM. Reread 91.9 again.

Further, if it was ALWAYS in the AFM, why does ARROW treat it as a distinct
document?

Cub Driver wrote:

But nobody can enforce the rule, right? The American pilot hasn't
violated any Americans regs until he crosses the border into Canada,
and as soon as he returns to the U.S. he isn't in violation any
longer. And the Canadian regs as you say don't apply to Americans.


The FCC regs apply to US registered aircraft and vessels even when
in other countries airspace or in international waters.

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:32:25 -0500, "Icebound"
wrote:

But any Canadian-registered flight from Canada to the USA (or any other
country) requires a license under Canadian (and International) rules, just
as any US-registered flight from the US to Canada (or any other country)
requires a license under USA (and International) rules.

But nobody can enforce the rule, right? The American pilot hasn't
violated any Americans regs until he crosses the border into Canada,
and as soon as he returns to the U.S. he isn't in violation any
longer. And the Canadian regs as you say don't apply to Americans.



The Canadian *waiver of license requirements* does not apply to Americans;
i.e.: American-registered planes require radio station and operator
licenses.

The "license requirement" is not a Canadian reg... it is an International
agreement. Canada (and all signatories to that agreement) are probably
*required* to enforce it, so by that agreement...

"John Galban" wrote in message
om...
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

Good points all. IIRC there was a recent case where a US-registered
flight
returning to the US was dinged for not having a radio license, but that
flight had not filed a flight plan, did not check in with Customs, landed
at
a private airfield, and then tried to evade Customs and Immigration, so
they
were trying to throw the book at him. I don't know if they made any of
the
charges stick, however.

According to the laws as they currently stand, they could not ding
the pilot of a U.S. registered plane for not having a station license
while flying in U.S. airspace, as none is required. They also cannot
ding said pilot for flying in Canadian airspace without the license,
as they have no jurisdiction. (Both the above comments assume that
some U.S. agency is attempting to do the dinging)

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

That is wrong the international treaty gives the US the jurustiction and
forces it to enforce the treaty on its' citizens.

Icebound wrote:

But since the AFM is required to be in the aircraft by FARs 91.9 b, I still
don't see why people are saying that W&B info does not have to be in the
aircraft???

Because some aircraft are not required to have an AFM (my '69 C-150 had none).

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.