[James Chan]

I guess they can't be seen to deal with the incident differently for FAA current or former employees, compared to everybody else.

Otherwise approved vehicle inspectors will feel like they'd be able to do stunt maneuvers on public roads and "get away" with it.

[Paul_Sengupta]

It's more a general legislation where you're not allowed to fly lower than 500ft AGL at all unless taking off or landing (SERA). We have an exemption for it to take us back to the previous 500ft from any person, structure, vehicle or vessel.

I disagree: 500ft does not relate just to altitude/height, it's in any direction:

So if you fly 200 ft under a bridge arch you are less than 500ft from a structure (It's above you and may have people on it).

Um, yes, quite, I'm not sure where the disagree comes into it. The bridge is 800 and something feet tall. In the UK you could be 300ft from the valley underneath, more than 500ft from the top and be legal. In France, you can't as you have to be 500ft AGL, so you can't be over 500ft AGL and 500ft below the bridge.

The pillars are over 1000ft apart.

[Rob L]

... 709 ride....

I've no idea what a 709 ride is in your context! Sounds like some of those hookers in Denver in 1984

[Josh]

Basically if you’ve been involved in any accident or incident the FAA has the power to compel you to take a retest for whatever certificate/rating you hold. The “709” bit comes from the section of the regulations that empowers them to do this. It’s a very widely used power and AOPA USA legal give pilots a lot of advice in this area I believe.

[Iceman]

The article states that she turned her transponder off. I can’t find anything in the regulations that states that she had to have her transponder on when operating in Class G airspace.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.215

She was more than 30 nm away from Cincinnati so outside their Mode-C veil and thus conformant with transponder operations in the vicinity of a Class-B (14 CFR § 91.215 (b) 2). The highlighted green circle shows the position of the bridge.



Iceman

[Rob L]

Basically if you’ve been involved in any accident or incident the FAA has the power to compel you to take a retest for whatever certificate/rating you hold. The “709” bit comes from the section of the regulations that empowers them to do this. It’s a very widely used power and AOPA USA legal give pilots a lot of advice in this area I believe.

(My emphasis) Source please?

Rob

[Josh]

49 USC § 44709

[manfieldmann]

If I ever get to the point where I couldn't give two shakes of a monkey's chucky about anything any more, I'm under the Ballachulish Bridge.
In similar circumstances, which one are you going under?

[Iceman]

It would have to be the Millau Bridge, just to annoy the French, then do a runner for the UK, never to visit France again. There’s no extradition treaty, post-Brexit, is there ?

If I couldn’t get there, Tower Bridge would be a must !

Iceman

[Rob L]

44709

If I were being unkind, I'd say that says 44709, rather than "709". But I know Josh so I know he means well.

[Flyin'Dutch']

I doubt Josh has invented that abbreviation.

[patowalker]

https://www.avweb.com/flight-safety/faa ... -709-ride/

[Iceman]

Some interesting material there.

In talking with FAA inspectors, we were told that the most common pilot competence events that triggered 709 rides were running out of fuel, a groundloop (with damage) or inadvertently landing gear up.

FAA inspectors and CFIs tell us that in about 10 percent of the 709 ride matters the pilot involved has kept flying too long and, because of the realities of aging, can no longer meet ACS standards

Iceman

[Miscellaneous]

If I ever get to the point where I couldn't give two shakes of a monkey's chucky about anything any more, I'm under the Ballachulish Bridge.
In similar circumstances, which one are you going under?

What's the attraction of the Ballachulish?

Surely for value for money it has to be three Forth Bridges? All 3 in one pass, one from the 19th Century, one from the 20th Century and one from the 21st Century. All marvels of engineering and works of art of the time.

[A4 Pacific]

The article states that she turned her transponder off. I can’t find anything in the regulations that states that she had to have her transponder on when operating in Class G airspace.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.215

She was more than 30 nm away from Cincinnati so outside their Mode-C veil and thus conformant with transponder operations in the vicinity of a Class-B (14 CFR § 91.215 (b) 2). The highlighted green circle shows the position of the bridge.



Iceman

This is the legislation that caught out the pilot in question. It’s intent is Crystal clear.

National Policy Effective Date: 01/24/2020
Page 9-13: “Single Acts of Misconduct Generally Warranting Revocation. Some acts of misconduct are, by their very nature, so egregious or significant as to demonstrate that the certificate holder does not possess the care, judgment, or responsibility to hold a certificate. These acts include, but are not limited to, those listed in Figure 9-5.”
Figure 9-5 on page 9-14 (#30) lists “Operating an aircraft without activated transponder or ADS-B Out transmission (except as provided in 14 C.F.R. § 91.225(f)) for purposes of evading detection.”