Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:07 AM - Flying over densely populated areas (craig)
2. 06:14 AM - C73>MTW>OSH (cjpilot710@aol.com)
3. 07:34 AM - Re: [SPAM] - Re: Flying over densely populated areas - Email found in subject (Ernie Martinez)
4. 07:55 AM - Re: Batman's a Grandad! (Richard Basiliere)
5. 08:10 AM - Re: [SPAM] - Re: Flying over densely populated areas (Richard Basiliere)
6. 08:45 AM - Re: Flying over densely populated areas (Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: Batman's a Grandad! (Jim Selby)
8. 09:42 AM - Re: Batman's a Grandad! (Sam Sax)
9. 11:27 AM - (no subject) (cjpilot710@aol.com)
10. 02:18 PM - (AirshowPilot1@aol.com)
11. 02:49 PM - Re: (Jackie)
12. 02:51 PM - Re: (Richard Basiliere)
13. 03:18 PM - Re: (A. Dennis Savarese)
14. 03:21 PM - Re: Flying over densely populated areas (owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com)
15. 03:56 PM - Re: Re: (ByronMFox@aol.com)
16. 07:31 PM - WIRING RUSSION HEADPHONE AND MIKE JACK PLUG IN YAK 52 (CHAD FELDPOUCH)
17. 08:25 PM - OSH/MTW (cjpilot710@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Flying over densely populated areas |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "craig" <rupilot@nvbell.net>
I dont post here much but I witnessed the F.A.A talk to the pilot of the Yak
52 ferry pilot that did the alleged violation. Because the case is not
over with yet I wont give out any details.
I will say this in a bit of advise. A cessna flying low is not the same
as a Yak 52 or any other experimental flying low over a densely populated
area. This violation probly didnt matter wether it was experimental or not
but it is a lot easyer to follow and find at the airport when you stand out
like a yak to an officail that might witness such an act.
Addition note. You dont want to open the door to you hanger with 2 mad as
heck F.A.A. guys. I have never seen as many pilots blend into the walls as
fast as that.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
keith.goolsby@eds.com, gaf127enl@msn.com, MDSHELLEY@aol.com,
yakjock@msn.com, walterfricke@yahoo.com, finleycj6@juno.com,
BDorsey777@aol.com, dabear@damned.org, TCalloway@hangar-d.com,
mason.t@worldnet.att.net, wpairprt@tdstelme.net, radialpower@cox.net,
KILOUSMC@aol.com, FamilyGage@aol.com, rvfltd@televar.com,
cd001633@mindspring.com, ernest.martinez@oracle.com, FOUGAPILOT@hotmail.com,
N23GD@yahoo.com, jtobul@tobul.com, tormentor34@netzero.net
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Troops,
Plan on starting out tomorrow. Right now my planned route is FD44 to OPN
(Thomaston, GA).> 0A3 (Smithville, TN.) > OEA (Vincennes, In.) > C73 Dixon, IL.
After the show at Dixon, I planned to leave Saturday afternoon for MTW.
All this depended on the weather gods and that the gremlins are still in the
cage.
My cell phone number is: 386-503-9820
OSH OR BUST!
Jim Goolsby
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
"The reason older men are like fine wine. When young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Flying over densely populated areas - |
Email found in subject
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
Ernie
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
- Email found in subject
--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for the
next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
violation?
Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
from
the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting for
some
zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth flying
these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
Jay L
> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -
Email
> found in subject
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>
> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
license for
> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to the
case
> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
area." We
> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
$20,000 of my
> time later we were successful.
>
> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Frank
> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
<yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>>
>> Mark
>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth I've
>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
able
>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
helmet
>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
hell
>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's good
>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
aspect
>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect of
>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will know
>> tyranny.
>>
>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
the
>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
perspective,
>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
>> populated area.
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich
>> GS11 Mark G
>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>
>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
blood
>> boil!
>>
>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a
>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
otherwise
>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
>>
>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in our
>> "Experimental
>> Exhibition" aircraft.
>>
>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
this
>> specific instruction?
>>
>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is
>> someone
>> supposed to know THAT?
>>
>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere"....
>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
usually
>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The idea
>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect of
our
>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what else
to
>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt and
>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
>>
>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be nice
if
>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
cases I
>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this
>> really make you wonder.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>> N50YK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>>
>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd. Planes
>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over the
>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about 45,000
>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
over
>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
>> specifies:
>>
>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be operated
>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
>> exercising........"
>>
>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
certificate
>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the FSDO
>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
>>
>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
not
>> you would be at risk.
>>
>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
>>
>> Hal Morley
>>
>>
>> ==
>> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>> ==
>> ==
>> ==
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==
==
==
==
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Batman's a Grandad! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Richard Basiliere" <BasiliereR@ci.boulder.co.us>
Congratulations and I hope all are healthy and happy. Ricky B
>>> Yakjock@msn.com 7/20/2004 10:48:45 PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
My lovely daughter gave birth to a baby girl this morning, my first
grandchild!
Batman
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
- Email found in subject
| Subject: | Flying over densely populated areas |
- Email found in subject
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Richard Basiliere" <BasiliereR@ci.boulder.co.us>
DEN FSDO dudes rattled that (densely populated) saber last fall, over my
aerobatic practice area. One house per 5-35 acres. They were "kind"
enough to go away after conversing with yours truly.
It would be nice to have the case # or something in writing in our
pockets - just in case...
Paid for or not, I thank you for the effort taking this to task.
Rick B
>>> ernest.martinez@oracle.com 7/21/2004 8:33:50 AM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez"
<ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
Ernie
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated
areas
- Email found in subject
--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for
the
next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
violation?
Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
from
the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting
for
some
zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth
flying
these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
Jay L
> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
-
Email
> found in subject
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>
> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
license for
> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to
the
case
> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
area." We
> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
$20,000 of my
> time later we were successful.
>
> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
"Frank
> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
<yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>>
>> Mark
>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth
I've
>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
able
>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
helmet
>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
hell
>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's good
>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
aspect
>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect
of
>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will know
>> tyranny.
>>
>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
the
>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
perspective,
>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
>> populated area.
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bitterlich
>> GS11 Mark G
>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>
>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
blood
>> boil!
>>
>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a
>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
otherwise
>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
>>
>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in
our
>> "Experimental
>> Exhibition" aircraft.
>>
>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
this
>> specific instruction?
>>
>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is
>> someone
>> supposed to know THAT?
>>
>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere"....
>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
usually
>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The
idea
>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect
of
our
>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what
else
to
>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt
and
>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
>>
>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be
nice
if
>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
cases I
>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this
>> really make you wonder.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>> N50YK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>>
>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd.
Planes
>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over
the
>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about
45,000
>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
over
>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
>> specifies:
>>
>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be
operated
>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
>> exercising........"
>>
>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
certificate
>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the
FSDO
>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
>>
>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
not
>> you would be at risk.
>>
>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
>>
>> Hal Morley
>>
>>
>> ==
>> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>> ==
>> ==
>> ==
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==
==
==
==
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| From: | "Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers" <wayne@engravers.net> |
| Subject: | Flying over densely populated areas |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Wayne @ Aircraft Engravers" <wayne@engravers.net>
How can the any of those FAA officials be and Oshkosh or Sun N' Fun and say
that the ultralights are not flying over/near a densely populated area? My
recollection is that at each end of the Paradise City Ultralight runway at
Sun N' Fun there is a parking lot full of people arriving in the morning and
a camping area the other end. Then there are the hundreds if not a thousand
or so spectators watching from the just past the orange fenced flight line
area. It might as well be a parade with all the people gathering there. So
is each and every FAA inspector that has witnessed these infractions in
dereliction of his/her duties for not stopping the flying?
Wayne
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Batman's a Grandad! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Jim Selby" <alikatz@mbay.net>
Congradulations Grandpa.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Batman's a Grandad!
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>
> My lovely daughter gave birth to a baby girl this morning, my first
grandchild!
>
> Batman
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Batman's a Grandad! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Sam Sax" <cd001633@mindspring.com>
Congratulations, Batman!!!
You are in for a lot of good times!! Enjoy!
When is she going for her first flight with you? :)
Sam Sax
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Yakjock
Subject: Yak-List: Batman's a Grandad!
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
My lovely daughter gave birth to a baby girl this morning, my first
grandchild!
Batman
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Herb, Russ,
The EAAWB guys want to know if a van coming or not, Call 920-426-4874.
Jim Goolsby
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
"The reason older men are like fine wine. When young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
Read your operating limitations very carefully. There should be an exception written
in that permits overflight for "takeoff and landing." If you do not find
it there get your operating limits amended to include it. Keep in mind that
every flying object in U.S. airspace is now very closely tracked and monitored.
I perform in air shows all over North America and I avoid yellow areas on
the VFR sectional unless I am in an approach or departure mode to an airport
close to the yellow. I would not try and seek clarity because you may get an
answer you do not like. The rule was written to preclude high performance fighter
aircraft operated by private individuals and the like from falling into the
middle of a city. Be prudent in your flight planning and make a reasonable
attempt to avoid flying smack over the middle of a large city enroute and make
sure you have the exception for takeoffs and landings written in your operating
limits and you should have a reasonable argument to counter any zealous types.
W. Addison Linscott
In a message dated 7/21/2004 10:33:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ernie Martinez"
<ernest.martinez@oracle.com> writes:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
>If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
>
>Ernie
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>- Email found in subject
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
>Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for the
>next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
>violation?
>
>Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
>from
>the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting for
>some
>zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth flying
>these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
>
>Jay L
>
>> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
>> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -
>Email
>> found in subject
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>>
>> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
>license for
>> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to the
>case
>> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
>area." We
>> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
>$20,000 of my
>> time later we were successful.
>>
>> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Frank
>> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
><yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth I've
>>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
>able
>>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
>helmet
>>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
>>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
>hell
>>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's good
>>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
>aspect
>>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect of
>>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will know
>>> tyranny.
>>>
>>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
>the
>>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
>perspective,
>>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
>>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
>>> populated area.
>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich
>>> GS11 Mark G
>>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>>
>>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
>blood
>>> boil!
>>>
>>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a
>>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>otherwise
>>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
>>>
>>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
>>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in our
>>> "Experimental
>>> Exhibition" aircraft.
>>>
>>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
>this
>>> specific instruction?
>>>
>>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is
>>> someone
>>> supposed to know THAT?
>>>
>>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere"....
>>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
>>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
>usually
>>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The idea
>>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect of
>our
>>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what else
>to
>>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt and
>>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
>>>
>>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
>>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be nice
>if
>>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
>cases I
>>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this
>>> really make you wonder.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>> N50YK
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>>>
>>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
>>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd. Planes
>>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over the
>>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about 45,000
>>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
>over
>>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
>>> specifies:
>>>
>>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be operated
>>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
>>> exercising........"
>>>
>>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
>>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
>certificate
>>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the FSDO
>>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
>>>
>>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
>not
>>> you would be at risk.
>>>
>>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
>>>
>>> Hal Morley
>>>
>>>
>>> ==
>>> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>>> ==
>>> ==
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>==
>==
>==
>==
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Jackie" <jflan1@excite.com>
@matronics.com has a virus that is duplicating throughout the email world...you
have infected my computer...find your problem and correct it, or, at least,
take me off any list you may have me on... jflan1@excite.com --- On Wed 07/21,
AirshowPilot1@aol.com wrote:
From: [mailto: AirshowPilot1@aol.com]To: yak-list@matronics.comDate: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:17:31 -0400Subject: -- Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.comRead your operating limitations very carefully. There should be an exception written in that permits overflight for "takeoff and landing." If you do not find it there get your operating limits amended to include it. Keep in mind that every flying object in U.S. airspace is now very closely tracked and monitored. I perform in air shows all over North America and I avoid yellow areas on the VFR sectional unless I am in an approach or departure mode to an airport close to the yellow. I would not try and seek clarity because you may get an answer you do not like. The rule was written to preclude high performance fighter aircraft operated by private individuals and the like from falling into the middle of a city. Be prudent in your flight planning and make a reasonable attempt to avoid flying smack over the middle of a
large city enroute and make sure you have the exception for takeoffs and landings written in your operating limits and you should have a reasonable argument!to counter any zealous types.W. Addison LinscottIn a message dated 7/21/2004 10:33:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ernie Martinez" writes:-- Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez" If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming. Ernie-----Original Message-----From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay LandTo: yak-list@matronics.comSubject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas- Email found in subject-- Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for thenext victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"violation?Sounds like a good point for our RPA g
roup to try to get "clarified"fromthe FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the
rules and just waiting forsomezealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not
really worth flyingthese planes around to airshows if that's the case.Jay L
From: Reply-To: Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400 To: Subject: [SPAM]
- RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -Email found in subject --
Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com I represented a pilot who
was facing a 180 day suspension of hislicense for overflying a "densely populated"
area. The FAA lawyer assigned to thecase argued that a cluster of 3 or more
houses was a "densely populatedarea." We argued that it was the yellow areas
depicted on the sectional.$20,000 of my time later we were successful. In
a message dated 7/12/2004
9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Frank Haertlein" writes: -- Yak-List message
posted by: "Frank Haertlein" Mark I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years
of life on this earth I've seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms.
From not beingable to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcyclehelmet
to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road tohell is paved
with good intentions........our government, with it's good intentions, will
become tyrannical some day. When virtually everyaspect of your life is prescribed
by some law and virtually every aspect of your behavior is governed by some
rule or regulation, you will know tyranny. By the way, your pro
gram letter is permission by the FAA to fly tothe events you have listed no matter
where they are. As anotherperspectiv
e, I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside, California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely populated area. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich GS11 Mark G To: 'yak-list@matronics.com' Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -- Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G -- I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes myblood boil! Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a densely populated areas or in congested airways, except whenotherwise directed by ATC or in
an emergency situation". Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay
attention to whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area"
in our "Experimental Exhibition" aircraft. Next: Just what IS a "densely populated
area" at least as regardsthis specific instruction? Worse, just what is
a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is someone supposed to know THAT?
Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere".... well,
heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low pass", otherwise
known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"usually specifies something done
at an airport or other legal area. The idea that the FAA would try to use the
"Densely populated area" aspect ofour aircraft
certification tells me that they can't figure out what elseto use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt and want to "get" someone no matter what it takes. Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be niceif the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in somecases I think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this really make you wonder. Mark Bitterlich N50YK -----Original Message----- From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com] To: yak-list@matronics.com Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -- Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" A heads up. Three of u
s here in Oregon have been preparing to do a flyover for a July 4th parade to
be held on Saturday, the 3rd. Planes included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade
was to be held over the town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis
of about 45,000 souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not
flyover the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
specifies: "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be operated
over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when otherwise
directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When exercising........" The
rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were complaints and the
FSDO is taking action against the pilot'scertificate using the "densely populated"
clause as a b
asis. The guy at the FSDO that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
You may wish to rere
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Richard Basiliere" <BasiliereR@ci.boulder.co.us>
Respectfully,
14 CFR 91.303 prohibits aerobatic flight over "congested area of a
city,town, settlement.."
It is nice to know "just where" a guy/gal can legally go vertical,
also.
Again, thanks for what you do.
Rick B
>>> AirshowPilot1@aol.com 7/21/2004 3:17:31 PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
Read your operating limitations very carefully. There should be an
exception written in that permits overflight for "takeoff and landing."
If you do not find it there get your operating limits amended to include
it. Keep in mind that every flying object in U.S. airspace is now very
closely tracked and monitored. I perform in air shows all over North
America and I avoid yellow areas on the VFR sectional unless I am in an
approach or departure mode to an airport close to the yellow. I would
not try and seek clarity because you may get an answer you do not like.
The rule was written to preclude high performance fighter aircraft
operated by private individuals and the like from falling into the
middle of a city. Be prudent in your flight planning and make a
reasonable attempt to avoid flying smack over the middle of a large city
enroute and make sure you have the exception for takeoffs and landings
written in your operating limits and you should have a reasonable
argument!
to counter any zealous types.
W. Addison Linscott
In a message dated 7/21/2004 10:33:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ernie
Martinez" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com> writes:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez"
<ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
>If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
>
>Ernie
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated
areas
>- Email found in subject
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
>Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for
the
>next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
>violation?
>
>Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
>from
>the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting
for
>some
>zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth
flying
>these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
>
>Jay L
>
>> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
>> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
-
>Email
>> found in subject
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>>
>> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
>license for
>> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to
the
>case
>> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
>area." We
>> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
>$20,000 of my
>> time later we were successful.
>>
>> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
"Frank
>> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
><yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth
I've
>>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
>able
>>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
>helmet
>>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
>>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
>hell
>>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's
good
>>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
>aspect
>>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect
of
>>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will
know
>>> tyranny.
>>>
>>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
>the
>>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
>perspective,
>>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
>>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
>>> populated area.
>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bitterlich
>>> GS11 Mark G
>>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>>
>>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
>blood
>>> boil!
>>>
>>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over
a
>>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>otherwise
>>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
>>>
>>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
>>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in
our
>>> "Experimental
>>> Exhibition" aircraft.
>>>
>>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
>this
>>> specific instruction?
>>>
>>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name
is
>>> someone
>>> supposed to know THAT?
>>>
>>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass
somewhere"....
>>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
>>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
>usually
>>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The
idea
>>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect
of
>our
>>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what
else
>to
>>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt
and
>>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
>>>
>>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
>>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be
nice
>if
>>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
>cases I
>>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like
this
>>> really make you wonder.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>> N50YK
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>>>
>>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
>>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd.
Planes
>>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over
the
>>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about
45,000
>>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
>over
>>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations
that
>>> specifies:
>>>
>>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be
operated
>>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
>>> exercising........"
>>>
>>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
>>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
>certificate
>>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the
FSDO
>>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
>>>
>>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
>not
>>> you would be at risk.
>>>
>>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
>>>
>>> Hal Morley
>>>
>>>
>>> ==
>>> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>>> ==
>>> ==
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>==
>==
>==
>==
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
All of your points are right on the money Addison. However, getting your
operating limitations rewritten may open up a can of worms for you at the
local FSDO, depending on how the inspector feels that day. He/she has the
authority to rewrite your entire ops limits if he/she so chooses and you
just may not like what the "new sheriff in town" wants to change them to.
As an example, we had a person with a existing set of ops limits relocating
to another airport within the geographic boundaries of the local FSDO. As
you know, the Special Airworthiness Certificate AND the Operating
Limitations are married together. Thus if you relocate your airplane from
its present home base airport you are required to have the Operating
Limitations amended to reflect the new home base airport. The FSDO
inspector chose to rewrite certain paragraphs which he decided should be in
the ops limits. The aircraft owner did not like the changes and basically
bantered back and forth with the FSDO inspector for weeks, finally agreeing
to some mutually acceptable changes. During that time his airplane was
grounded. When the Ops Limits are rewritten/amended by the FSDO, they also
have the opportunity to add or change or delete certain paragraphs if he/she
so chooses to do so. If you do not like the changes, then you either
negotiate with the inspector to find a mutually acceptable common ground or
you do not get your new ops limits and Airworthiness Certificate issued.
Basically, you're grounded. They have the power to do it and they will.
So my question is, if the Ops Limits do not have the overflight for "takeoff
and landing" paragraph, should you really open up Pandora's box or should
you simply maintain a low profile and avoid the "congested" yellow areas on
the VFR charts?
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>
> Read your operating limitations very carefully. There should be an
exception written in that permits overflight for "takeoff and landing." If
you do not find it there get your operating limits amended to include it.
Keep in mind that every flying object in U.S. airspace is now very closely
tracked and monitored. I perform in air shows all over North America and I
avoid yellow areas on the VFR sectional unless I am in an approach or
departure mode to an airport close to the yellow. I would not try and seek
clarity because you may get an answer you do not like. The rule was written
to preclude high performance fighter aircraft operated by private
individuals and the like from falling into the middle of a city. Be prudent
in your flight planning and make a reasonable attempt to avoid flying smack
over the middle of a large city enroute and make sure you have the exception
for takeoffs and landings written in your operating limits and you should
have a reasonable argument!
> to counter any zealous types.
>
> W. Addison Linscott
>
> In a message dated 7/21/2004 10:33:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ernie
Martinez" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com> writes:
>
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez"
<ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> >
> >If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
> >
> >Ernie
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
> >To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
> >- Email found in subject
> >
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
> >
> >Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for the
> >next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
> >violation?
> >
> >Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
> >from
> >the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting for
> >some
> >zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth flying
> >these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
> >
> >Jay L
> >
> >> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
> >> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
> >> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -
> >Email
> >> found in subject
> >>
> >> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
> >>
> >> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
> >license for
> >> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to the
> >case
> >> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
> >area." We
> >> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
> >$20,000 of my
> >> time later we were successful.
> >>
> >> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Frank
> >> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
> >>
> >>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
> ><yak52driver@earthlink.net>
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth I've
> >>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
> >able
> >>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
> >helmet
> >>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
> >>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
> >hell
> >>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's good
> >>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
> >aspect
> >>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect of
> >>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will know
> >>> tyranny.
> >>>
> >>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
> >the
> >>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
> >perspective,
> >>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
> >>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
> >>> populated area.
> >>> Frank
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich
> >>> GS11 Mark G
> >>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
> >>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
> >>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
> >>>
> >>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
> >blood
> >>> boil!
> >>>
> >>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a
> >>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
> >otherwise
> >>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
> >>>
> >>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
> >>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in our
> >>> "Experimental
> >>> Exhibition" aircraft.
> >>>
> >>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
> >this
> >>> specific instruction?
> >>>
> >>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is
> >>> someone
> >>> supposed to know THAT?
> >>>
> >>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere"....
> >>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
> >>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
> >usually
> >>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The idea
> >>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect of
> >our
> >>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what else
> >to
> >>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt and
> >>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
> >>>
> >>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
> >>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be nice
> >if
> >>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
> >cases I
> >>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this
> >>> really make you wonder.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Bitterlich
> >>> N50YK
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
> >>>
> >>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
> >>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd. Planes
> >>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over the
> >>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about 45,000
> >>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
> >over
> >>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
> >>> specifies:
> >>>
> >>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be operated
> >>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
> >>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
> >>> exercising........"
> >>>
> >>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
> >>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
> >certificate
> >>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the FSDO
> >>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
> >>>
> >>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
> >not
> >>> you would be at risk.
> >>>
> >>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
> >>>
> >>> Hal Morley
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ==
> >>> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
> >>> ==
> >>> ==
> >>> ==
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >==
> >==
> >==
> >==
> >
> >
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by:
Subject: RE: Flying over densely populated areas
Great suggestions, but also please remember that the regulation also
specified "Congested Airways". Sure, some pilots will point to the "Unless
otherwise directed by ATC" as a means to avoid that problem, but many is the
time I have asked for Radar Following and have had that service DENIED. I
would assume that this happens when those "Airways" are getting very
"Congested". (?) What then? Should I also avoid flying in Airways when
denied Radar Following?
As to Ernie's comment: "If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the
street screaming." Let me say on the surface this seems to make sense. It
kind of falls into the category that also says: It is always easier to beg
for forgiveness than to ask for permission..... a statement I have found to
be true with ANY kind of dealings with ANY kind of bureaucracy in this
country.
BUT...... what I see about these rules is simply this: They allow the FAA
to pick and choose who they are going to "mess" with (a much stronger word
comes to mind). They can ignore 99% of the every day violators of this rule
(such as was pointed out at Sun & Fun), but then come down on some poor
individual with the Hammer of Thor when they decide he or she "needs a
lesson".
Sure, we should let sleeping dogs lie. We should not ask for answers to
questions that we might not like the answer we end up getting. We should
walk through life with our heads down and mouth SHUT and hope that it is
always the OTHER guy that gets noticed and not poor little ole ME.
And yes... maybe the EAA said that this rule in "unenforceable"... but they
neglect to mention how much your lawyer fees will be should the FAA decide
to give it a shot.
So gentleman... Once again, I am sorry for venting and you can flame me if
you want, but after having "participated" in every darn war this country has
managed to get itself involved in from Vietnam to present day... there is
something about this way of thinking that really bothers me. Something
inside of ME says we should attack this question head on, and if we don't
like the answer, then get it changed.
Sorry, just my 2 cents... and to make matters worse, I will tell you (as an
adjunct) that I about went berserk the other day when I saw major headlines
that quoted: A black haired young man is wanted by the Office of Homeland
Security for "taking picures" of a refinary.
At some point... we either address these kinds of problems head on, or ....
give up and watch what freedoms we have left go away under the guise of
"Homeland Security".
Ok... my Nomex flight suit is all zipped up....
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: AirshowPilot1@aol.com [mailto:AirshowPilot1@aol.com]
Subject:
--> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
Read your operating limitations very carefully. There should be an
exception written in that permits overflight for "takeoff and landing." If
you do not find it there get your operating limits amended to include it.
Keep in mind that every flying object in U.S. airspace is now very closely
tracked and monitored. I perform in air shows all over North America and I
avoid yellow areas on the VFR sectional unless I am in an approach or
departure mode to an airport close to the yellow. I would not try and seek
clarity because you may get an answer you do not like. The rule was written
to preclude high performance fighter aircraft operated by private
individuals and the like from falling into the middle of a city. Be prudent
in your flight planning and make a reasonable attempt to avoid flying smack
over the middle of a large city enroute and make sure you have the exception
for takeoffs and landings written in your operating limits and you should
have a reasonable argument!
to counter any zealous types.
W. Addison Linscott
In a message dated 7/21/2004 10:33:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ernie
Martinez" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com> writes:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie Martinez"
<ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
>If you don't want to get noticed don't walk down the street screaming.
>
>Ernie
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Land
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>- Email found in subject
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
>Is there a transcript of your case anywhere that might be useful for the
>next victim of subjective enforcement of the "densely populated area"
>violation?
>
>Sounds like a good point for our RPA group to try to get "clarified"
>from
>the FAA. Otherwise, we are all breaking the rules and just waiting for
>some
>zealous FSDO guy to decide to violate us. It's not really worth flying
>these planes around to airshows if that's the case.
>
>Jay L
>
>> From: <AirshowPilot1@aol.com>
>> Reply-To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:15:20 -0400
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: [SPAM] - RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas -
>Email
>> found in subject
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: AirshowPilot1@aol.com
>>
>> I represented a pilot who was facing a 180 day suspension of his
>license for
>> overflying a "densely populated" area. The FAA lawyer assigned to the
>case
>> argued that a cluster of 3 or more houses was a "densely populated
>area." We
>> argued that it was the yellow areas depicted on the sectional.
>$20,000 of my
>> time later we were successful.
>>
>> In a message dated 7/12/2004 9:58:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Frank
>> Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
><yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> I can sympathize with you. In my 47 years of life on this earth I've
>>> seen all kinds of restrictions put on my freedoms. From not being
>able
>>> to fly over the Grand Canyon to being made to wear a motorcycle
>helmet
>>> to having countless millions of acres of camping ground made off
>>> limits........and that's just the tip of the iceberg. The road to
>hell
>>> is paved with good intentions........our government, with it's good
>>> intentions, will become tyrannical some day. When virtually every
>aspect
>>> of your life is prescribed by some law and virtually every aspect of
>>> your behavior is governed by some rule or regulation, you will know
>>> tyranny.
>>>
>>> By the way, your program letter is permission by the FAA to fly to
>the
>>> events you have listed no matter where they are. As another
>perspective,
>>> I completed my phase 1 operating limitations transiting Riverside,
>>> California. You would be hard pressed to NOT call that a densely
>>> populated area.
>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich
>>> GS11 Mark G
>>> To: 'yak-list@matronics.com'
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>>> --> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>>
>>> I am SO sorry for venting, but this kind of nonsense just makes my
>blood
>>> boil!
>>>
>>> Stop and think about this for a minute: "May not be operated over a
>>> densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>otherwise
>>> directed by ATC or in an emergency situation".
>>>
>>> Ok, now how many of us fly on a cross country and pay attention to
>>> whether we happen to be flying over a "densely populated area" in our
>>> "Experimental
>>> Exhibition" aircraft.
>>>
>>> Next: Just what IS a "densely populated area" at least as regards
>this
>>> specific instruction?
>>>
>>> Worse, just what is a "Congested Airway" and how in heavens name is
>>> someone
>>> supposed to know THAT?
>>>
>>> Hal then wrote: "The rumor is someone did a low pass somewhere"....
>>> well, heck... there are plenty of rules that cover an illegal "low
>>> pass", otherwise known as flat-hatting. But the term "low pass"
>usually
>>> specifies something done at an airport or other legal area. The idea
>>> that the FAA would try to use the "Densely populated area" aspect of
>our
>>> aircraft certification tells me that they can't figure out what else
>to
>>> use EXCEPT for this, which tells ME that they are on a witch hunt and
>>> want to "get" someone no matter what it takes.
>>>
>>> Regardless, it would be interesting to see the FAA really try to
>>> prosecute a pilot for an "infraction" of this type. It would be nice
>if
>>> the FAA could be our friends instead of our enemies, and in some
>cases I
>>> think that relationship might actually exist, but stories like this
>>> really make you wonder.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>> N50YK
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Yakjock [mailto:Yakjock@msn.com]
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Yak-List: Flying over densely populated areas
>>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
>>>
>>> A heads up. Three of us here in Oregon have been preparing to do a
>>> flyover for a July 4th parade to be held on Saturday, the 3rd. Planes
>>> included a Yak 11, Yak 52 and CJ. The parade was to be held over the
>>> town of Hillsboro, a pretty widely spread metropolis of about 45,000
>>> souls. We received word from the local FSDO that we could not fly
>over
>>> the parade due to the prohibition in our Operating Limitations that
>>> specifies:
>>>
>>> "Except for takeoffs and landings, this aircraft may not be operated
>>> over densely populated areas or in congested airways, except when
>>> otherwise directed by ATC or in an emergency situation. When
>>> exercising........"
>>>
>>> The rumor is that someone did a low pass somewhere and there were
>>> complaints and the FSDO is taking action against the pilot's
>certificate
>>> using the "densely populated" clause as a basis. The guy at the FSDO
>>> that warned our group is a friend of one of the pilots.
>>>
>>> You may wish to reread your limitations and think about whether or
>not
>>> you would be at risk.
>>>
>>> Heck of a way to celebrate Independence Day!
>>>
>>> Hal Morley
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: ByronMFox@aol.com
In a message dated 7/21/04 3:19:04 PM, adsavar@gte.net writes:
> If you do not like the changes, then you either
> negotiate with the inspector to find a mutually acceptable common ground or
> you do not get your new ops limits and Airworthiness Certificate issued.
> Basically, you're grounded.=A0 They have the power to do it and they will.
>
I concur with Dennis. Three years ago, the Oakland FSDO glanced at my
so-called "pre-moritorium" documentation and brushed it aside. In marriage,=20child
rearing and with the FAA, you pick your battles carefully. ...Blitz
Byron M. Fox
Mill Valley, CA
Nanchang CJ-6A
N221YK
415-307-2405
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | WIRING RUSSION HEADPHONE AND MIKE JACK PLUG IN YAK 52 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: CHAD FELDPOUCH <1pouch@sbcglobal.net>
hi,
I am trying to wire an original round russion headphone / mike connector back
in my yak 52 . It is already wired for regular headset plugs . i would just like
to make a jumper out of the russion round plug and put standard male ends on
it to plug a chinese tk-2 helmet with throat mike in to the yak . The round
female plug has four wires , red, yellow , green and white . The standard male
plugs have three positions on the mike plug ( ground, middle and forward ) positions.
The headphone plug has just two ( ground and one position) . Also does
anyone know how well a throat mike works .
Thanks in advance .
Chad.........
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Duncan1574@hotmail.com
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Looks like we'll be flying in the EAA shows on:
Tuesday 27th
Friday 30th
Saturday 31st
Sunday 1st
Wednesday 28 is Mustang day.
Thursday 29 is Forms day.
Jim Goolsby
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
"The reason older men are like fine wine. When young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|