Other than FAA regs affect pilots

[Let'sgoflying!]

Inadvertent buzzing of nests, 565$ fine.

http://www.oaoa.com/news/eagle-60672-pilots-llano.html

 

[Jim Logajan]

The FAA has sole regulatory authority over the airspace. Their method of communication to pilots is NOTAMs. Anything else is patently illegal.

I believe the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 gives them sole authority only over navigable airspace, rather than all airspace. I believe you'll find the definition for navigable airspace in the FAR/AIM. Its seems to coincide with section 91.119, minimum safe altitudes.

Odd thing though - when I follow all the legal definitions and Part 91 regs, it seems the regs say pilots entering or leaving navigable airspace for any purpose other than taking off or landing are in violation of said regs. On the other hand the legislation that authorizes their regime of authority seems to indicate they have no authority there.

So if you fly too close to assemblages of people, you may meet the criteria to be in violation of FAA regs, but on the other hand you also technically meet the criteria placing you outside the airspace that the FAA has, presumably by definition and legislative mandate, authority over.

(Clearly I have no grasp of the nuances of the law - there is probably no contradiction.)

 

[Jim Logajan]

Murdering someone by flying into him is ok if there's no FAR or NOTAM telling you not to. And, at worst, you won't get any penalty other than a license revocation.

Nice theory.

See, I =do= need to add that last item to my signature block.

Non sequitur and straw man argument.

Murder and an infinite number of other things has naught to do with arguments over what government agencies have authority to dictate movement restrictions in airspace.

 

[Jim Logajan]

The ultralight pilot in question was fined for violating a State wildlife protection statute, not a FAR. The fact that an aircraft was involved is incidental. He would have accrued the same fine if he used a ladder to get close to the nest.

Suppose the state protection statute said the closest vertical distance was 5000 feet - use of an aircraft still incidental?

The jurisdictional area is not "incidental" - it appears to be the core of the thread.

 

[Jim Logajan]

And one final thought: Though the FAA through congressional mandate has occupied the field of civil airspace regulation they have no such mandate for regulating criminal conduct in the airspace.

That's a reasonable point - and I assume would be particularly true for civil law also.

I tried Google searching the subject of legal jurisdiction of crimes committed in the air and discovered whole books had been written on the subject. Couldn't find any clarity on how broad a reach state laws can be drawn or interpreted before they are considered overstepping into Federal jurisdiction. E.g. what if a pilot of a noisy helicopter had been fined by the state for circling at 3000 ft?

Who has jurisdiction of crimes committed in aircraft? This gives some ideas:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/781350.html

I would not think noise regulations would per se be within the mandate of the FAA, but there is this (several other examples can be found):

http://www.ci.huntington-beach.ca.us/government/departments/Planning/AircraftNoise.cfm

 

[Jim Logajan]

When i was young, drunk and stupid, i made 3 low passes over an open air assembly (rock concert). The FAA liftem my ticket for awhile, then the state arrested me in a restaurant for same offense. They issued a warrant for reckless operation of an aircraft. The fine was about $300.00. I sobered up a little over 28 years ago.

Were the Eagles playing songs from their album Desperado at this rock concert?

I don't think the Eagles have been considered endangered since their reunion. :wink2: