VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > Safety
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-02-2011, 07:35 AM
Louise Hose's Avatar
Louise Hose Louise Hose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton, Nevada --- A34
Posts: 1,469
Default Professionals play by the rules?.or at least have a well thought through strategy

I currently work for the National Park Service. Anyone who has visited one of our parks knows that there are plenty of restrictions for safety, environmental/heritage protection, and bureaucratic reasons. Despite my personal misgivings and frustration with some rules and their limitations on my personal freedoms, I do not claim a right to violate those regs and rules while on vacation at a park. If I were to throw stones off the Rim of the Grand Canyon, potentially endangering hikers below, I would hope someone would report me?..even if it threatened my livelihood. I?m potentially endangering people. (I have been the person cowering under a boulder as some twit threw rocks from an overlook, sure that no one was below!) If I carved my honey?s name into a tree bark on a weekend visit, I would expect to be reported. I sure can?t imagine trying to bully or intimidate people who wanted to stop my behavior. (I might add that as a scientist, I have never felt the compulsion to ignore the proper scientific methodology and procedures when I write a scientific paper on my own time and dime. And, I?d fully expect to be called on it if I did!)

So, why do some paid (or even unpaid) pilots in our community think they have a right to flagrantly violate the rules and regs without consequences? How many professions have practitioners that think they don?t have to behave legally when off the clock? The immaturity of this attitude is mind-boggling to me. And, snitching? I don?t think I?ve ever heard adults use that term outside of the aviation world and television (usually a Mythbuster parodying a convict). I occasionally think I?m back in a junior high school classroom when reading some forum discussions like the one on Doug?s personal rules.

In my humble opinion, if you want to violate laws, regulations, and rules, you have three reasonable choices:

1. Work to change the rules (and just whining doesn?t count);

2. Go be a ?cowboy? in a manner and place that it doesn?t impact anyone else. Go express your freedom away from airports and inhabited areas (and, please, away from national parks!). If no one sees you do it, no one is going to report you; and

3. If you chose to violate laws, regs, and rules, don't advertise/publicize your misdeeds. It impacts others if you put them in the uncomfortable position of trying to decide if they should report your activities. It also reflects poorly on the maturity of our community. If you want to make a statement of protest by ?civil? disobedience, a tradition considered by most in the U.S. to be fair tactic as long as no one else is endangered, please ensure no one outside yourself is at risk and go ahead. But, be prepared to take the consequences like any ?professional? protestor would do.

I will now step off the soapbox?.
__________________
Louise Hose, Editor of The Homebuilder's Portal by KITPLANES
RV3B, NX13PL "Tsamsiyu" co-builder, TMXIO-320, test platform Legacy G3X/TruTrak avionics suite
RV-6 ?Mikey? (purchased flying) ? Garmin test platform (G3X Touch, GS28 autopilot servos, GTN650 GPS/Nav/Comm,
GNC255 Nav/Com, GA240 audio panel)
RV8, N188PD "Valkyrie" (by marriage)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-02-2011, 07:49 AM
L.Adamson's Avatar
L.Adamson L.Adamson is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: KSLC
Posts: 4,021
Default

Makes good sense to me!

L.Adamson --- RV6A
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-02-2011, 10:47 AM
MartinPred's Avatar
MartinPred MartinPred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Overseas
Posts: 157
Default Specific Violations

Louise,

Can you be a little more specific on what FARs you've seen violated? Are you talking about low level? As you know, Part 91 does not specify a minimum altitude in sparsely populated areas so long as the aircraft is not flown "...closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure." Also, the pilot must fly at "an altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface." (91.119).

Now, there's a disciplined way to fly low and an undisciplined way. When flying low, I carefully plan my route, avoid wildlife preserves (even though the 2,000 minimum altitude is a "request"), not fly the area until I've flown it a higher altitude first, carry plenty of airspeed, don't do aerobatics, and give people/property a wide berth.

-Matt
402BD
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-02-2011, 01:27 PM
DanH's Avatar
DanH DanH is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 9,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louise Hose View Post
I occasionally think I?m back in a junior high school classroom when reading some forum discussions like the one on Doug?s personal rules.
You consider it juvenile to suggest a higher success rate with (a) respect and peer approval than with (b) calling the authorities?
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-02-2011, 01:33 PM
N941WR's Avatar
N941WR N941WR is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 12,887
Default

Are you talking about Senator Inhofe landing on a closed runway and nearly hitting some workers while getting barely a slap on the wrist?
__________________
Bill R.
RV-9 (Yes, it's a dragon tail)
O-360 w/ dual P-mags
Build the plane you want, not the plane others want you to build!
SC86 - Easley, SC
www.repucci.com/bill/baf.html
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-02-2011, 01:42 PM
Danny7 Danny7 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: central oregon
Posts: 1,089
Default

Coming from someone that works outside of the major bureaucracies of the federal government, there is a very real difference between someone that wants to get involved with the feds on any enforcement action. I don't know, but i suppose that from long time employment at NASA for Paul and you with the NPS there are different rules for the employees vs the people.

with the proliferation of laws that are hard to keep track of, have life changing consequences, and seem tailored to selective enforcement, most people view getting authorities involved on anything less than life and death to be somehting to be avoided.

that is my stance, i don't have a mafia mentality of avoiding being a snitch, i don't want someones life ruined for selective enforcement of laws that don't make sense
__________________
nothing special here...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:06 PM
Toobuilder's Avatar
Toobuilder Toobuilder is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louise Hose View Post
...I occasionally think I?m back in a junior high school classroom when reading some forum discussions like the one on Doug?s personal rules...
I feel the same way when reading some of these posts!

...Of course, it is for the exact opposite reason than you have expressed.

So which one of us is "right"?

Anyway, I do mostly agree with your 3 points. It is only the tipping point which causes a moral conflict (i.e. "should I report this guy, or not?"), that we may differ.

I would report someone only if it was a particularly egregious violation that was very likely to cause injury to innocents - others might turn in a pilot for making an improper radio call. Both positions could be fully justified... And that is the main problem here.

Doug has indicated that ANY violation posted on "his" site is likely to be forwarded to "the authorities". Since I don't know Doug, I can only take statements like that at face value. I don't know about you, but that certainly tempers the level of "communication" that I'm willing to engage in.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.

Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI
RV-8 - SDS CPI
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65
1984 L39C
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:09 PM
Louise Hose's Avatar
Louise Hose Louise Hose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton, Nevada --- A34
Posts: 1,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH View Post
You consider it juvenile to suggest a higher success rate with (a) respect and peer approval than with (b) calling the authorities?
I don't understand the question, at least option "a", and I didn't say a word about whether someone should or shouldn't call the authorities. My comments were about people who think they should be immune to being reported.....not whether they should be reported. You want to talk about the people who call the authorities, start your own thread.
__________________
Louise Hose, Editor of The Homebuilder's Portal by KITPLANES
RV3B, NX13PL "Tsamsiyu" co-builder, TMXIO-320, test platform Legacy G3X/TruTrak avionics suite
RV-6 ?Mikey? (purchased flying) ? Garmin test platform (G3X Touch, GS28 autopilot servos, GTN650 GPS/Nav/Comm,
GNC255 Nav/Com, GA240 audio panel)
RV8, N188PD "Valkyrie" (by marriage)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:13 PM
Louise Hose's Avatar
Louise Hose Louise Hose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton, Nevada --- A34
Posts: 1,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinPred View Post
Louise,

Can you be a little more specific on what FARs you've seen violated? Are you talking about low level?
I suppose I could try to recite FARs that I've seen violated, but I wasn't commenting on any flying actions I've seen. I commented on an attitude I see often displayed on these forums. Just read the posts in Doug's personal standards page and you'll see several great examples.
__________________
Louise Hose, Editor of The Homebuilder's Portal by KITPLANES
RV3B, NX13PL "Tsamsiyu" co-builder, TMXIO-320, test platform Legacy G3X/TruTrak avionics suite
RV-6 ?Mikey? (purchased flying) ? Garmin test platform (G3X Touch, GS28 autopilot servos, GTN650 GPS/Nav/Comm,
GNC255 Nav/Com, GA240 audio panel)
RV8, N188PD "Valkyrie" (by marriage)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:38 PM
Louise Hose's Avatar
Louise Hose Louise Hose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton, Nevada --- A34
Posts: 1,469
Unhappy You know, I find that comment offensive

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny7 View Post
Coming from someone that works outside of the major bureaucracies of the federal government, there is a very real difference between someone that wants to get involved with the feds on any enforcement action. I don't know, but i suppose that from long time employment at NASA for Paul and you with the NPS there are different rules for the employees vs the people.
First, I'm certainly not a career bureaucrat (coming into this world only recently), so my culture and perspective is far more molded from a career in academia than the federal government. That said, I have frankly felt compelled to put aside some of my more "cowboy" behavior in national parks once I became an employee. I hold myself to a higher standard when it comes to following the rules, on and off the job, than I did or probably will when I'm not an employee. I've mostly given up one of my greatest passions because I find the current rules too restrictive and my personal code while an employee doesn't allow me to act on my second "reasonable" option for violating rules/regs . I have to say that as I write this response, I'm offended that you think I would violate rules and regs as a privilege of my job. I expect that Paul will feel the same way when he reads your comment.

Paul wrote me when he saw my post that it was a good thing my avatar has a climbing hardhat on!

Again, I didn't delve into whether a person should be reported or not. I say you shouldn't have an expectation of NOT being reported if you violate FARs....in the air, in a national park, or in the air over a national park.
__________________
Louise Hose, Editor of The Homebuilder's Portal by KITPLANES
RV3B, NX13PL "Tsamsiyu" co-builder, TMXIO-320, test platform Legacy G3X/TruTrak avionics suite
RV-6 ?Mikey? (purchased flying) ? Garmin test platform (G3X Touch, GS28 autopilot servos, GTN650 GPS/Nav/Comm,
GNC255 Nav/Com, GA240 audio panel)
RV8, N188PD "Valkyrie" (by marriage)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:43 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.