It's Ramp Check season in Alaska

I’ve seen it go both ways, but generally the inspectors just want to check boxes that they did there job with a min. Of paperwork and lingering problems that would come back to them. I don't look for anything like field approvals to get done but on the other hand I don’t see any of them looking too deep to hang anyone anymore. I guess you have to take the good with the bad.

Earlier this summer my private pilot daughter did an intersection take off and turned right onto the runway instead of turning left-i.e. she took off on in the wrong direction (or wrong runway.). There was no conflicting traffic and almost no wind. She was in the Super Legend, so she didn’t use much pavement.

The tower told her to call. She called and they got her personal information.

She then called her flight instructor. He suggested completing and logging remedial ground school on airport signage and radio clearances. She filed a NASA report and completed the ground school.

Two and a half months later, the FAA called. The FAA rep emailed her the pilot’s bill of rights and told her to call back after reading it. Based on the third hand advice of a former FAA inspector, my daughter emailed the NASA receipt and the logbook entry. She called the rep and laid it out in the table owning up to her mistake (contrary to my instincts). The rep had her put it in writing. The rep decided to end it there. The end result was “counseling” with no further enforcement action. The rep was nice and professional throughout the interaction.

According to the FAA rep, her taking immediate action with a CFI played a big part in his decision. As a former criminal lawyer, I don’t know how I feel about the process. I am very pleased with the result, but it seems odd to have to confess in hopes of getting leniency. My daughter made a mistake. Nobody was in danger. We reached the right result, but she went through a lot stress and uncertainty getting there.

No moral here, just one person’s recent experience with the FAA.

I once complained to a guy I worked for that "we are paying these folks good money, why can't they act like professionals?". His response was, "We are not dealing with professionals, we are dealing with people". I've always remembered that odd exchange whenever I encounter someone in a position of authority or judgement, and that somewhere behind that badge on a lanyard is a person - and that is what I need to stay tuned in to.

It's worked pretty good so far...

sj

Lasater said:

….She called the rep and laid it out in the table owning up to her mistake (contrary to my instincts). The rep had her put it in writing. The rep decided to end it there. The end result was “counseling” with no further enforcement action. The rep was nice and professional throughout the interaction. …..

Click to expand...

The first instinct is denial, kinda like telling the cop you weren't speeding after he nails you with the radar gun,

We are not talking about ramp check encounters now ,but just encounters with the FAA in general.
A few years back construction was taking place at an airport, moving the runway lights inward from 150’ to 100’ . The runway had been open for 2 weeks while it was going on, planes were taking off and landing within 25’ of workers.
One day they closed the runway by sandbagging an X on the ends , They blew off! A pilot did his daily take off as he had for the days before. The supervisor of the work crew filed a complaint, the pilot went to Atlanta to contest it. At the hearing the bureaucrats agreed With the pilot that it was the work crews fault for the infraction.
The Problem arose when in the course of the interaction the pilot trying to be as honest as he could admitted that he did not check the notams prior to taking off. Even though the AWAS was down at the airport and had been for two days. At that point the bureaucrats sealed the deal and said that the pilot admitted to not doing all he could as an airman to ensure a safe flight for that day and Violated him with a 90 day suspension, Said they would do him a favor and make it retroactive back to the original infraction date. Cost him his license for 30 days!:evil:
The pilot learned that you NEVER NEVER EVER admit to anything, educate yourself bout the issues and fight. They are not trying to be fair or even establish who’s at fault....They are only trying to establish if a pilot broke a Reg. as THEY INTERPRET IT!
I know there are exceptions to every rule, But there’s a reason AOPA counsels don’t admit anything and is usually better to not even respond till you have the infraction they think you breached in writing.
It’s been the pilots experience, When a person spends years working in an environment that is as broken as the FAA is , It tends to screw with that persons ability to act with the reasonable encounter we would all desire to have!

flyrite said:

…..One day they closed the runway by sandbagging an X on the ends , They blew off! A pilot did his daily take off as he had for the days before. The supervisor of the work crew filed a complaint, the pilot went to Atlanta to contest it. At the hearing the bureaucrats agreed With the pilot that it was the work crews fault for the infraction. The Problem arose when in the course of the interaction the pilot trying to be as honest as he could admitted that he did not check the notams prior to taking off. Even though the AWAS was down at the airport and had been for two days....

Click to expand...

Was there a "runway closed" NOTAM?
Although I rarely check notams unless I think there's a specific reason to,
I admit I would be at fault if I landed on a closed runway- X'd out or not.
(actually done it a couple times, at a Podunk airport-
but luckily no harm / no foul, so no violation).

I'm curious what the AWOS has to do with a NOTAM or even with the runway being closed.
I once suggested to an airport manager that they add the recent CTAF change to their AWOS announcement-
he told me that FAA told him that the AWOS is for weather information only.
Seemed dumb to both of us, but he said that's what he was told.

hotrod180 said:

Was there a "runway closed" NOTAM?
Although I rarely check notams unless I think there's a specific reason to,
I admit I would be at fault if I landed on a closed runway- X'd out or not.
(actually done it a couple times, at a Podunk airport-
but luckily no harm / no foul, so no violation).

I'm curious what the AWOS has to do with a NOTAM or even with the runway being closed.
I once suggested to an airport manager that they add the recent CTAF change to their AWOS announcement-
he told me that FAA told him that the AWOS is for weather information only.
Seemed dumb to both of us, but he said that's what he was told.

Click to expand...

Anything going on at our airport has been included as remarks at the end of the awas report by the manager. May not be a requirement but, Runway mantaince, Airshow closings, anything they think is of a “Notice to an Airman “ :lol: Been that way for years!.
But as your convo with the FAA demonstrates....They ain’t bout mak’n cents ! Or I wouldn’t have lost my ticket .