Mogollon Pancake Fly-In June 20 (AZ)

[Bill Palmer]

In response to the "No Trespassing" comments:

#1: The "No Trespassing" warning does not apply during the EAA Pancake Fly-In, so PLEASE TRESPASS ON JUNE 20th!

Background:

Mogollon Airpark's runway, taxiways, parking areas, and other facilities (clubhouse, picnic area, tennis courts, etc.) are owned and very well-maintained by the airpark homeowners. Up to a couple of years ago, Mogollon Airpark had only the usual "Prior Permission Required" notification. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, Mogollon Airpark is located in a very attractive tourist area. Several non-guest, un-sponsored pilots were starting to use Mogollon Airpark regularly as if it was a publicly owned and maintained airport. Un-sponsored pilots were simply ignoring the airpark's posted rules, including operations and safety rules, for their own convenience. Some were parking their aircraft at Mogollon for extended periods of time.

The most significant problem was that the airpark's homeowners association was, and is, liable for airport operations and safety. For the EAA fly-in, EAA Chapter 1044 obtains insurance through the EAA. Otherwise, for all other days of the year, the homeowners association is responsible. Upon the advice of the association's attorney and coordination with the sheriff's office, it was decided to implement the warning and fine. This did stop those who were using the airpark's facilities without permission, but, unfortunately, according to the attorney, the "No Trespass" warning must be posted on the home page to make sure that it is visible. This warning may give the impression that Mogollon is an unfriendly place, but just the opposite is true!

For those who know Mogollon homeowners and fly-in regularly, with permission, to visit them, Mogollon is one of the friendliest airparks on the face of the planet! The main reason that my wife and I decided to buy a house and hangar lot at Mogollon was the extremely friendly response we received when we drove to Overgaard to check-out the airpark. The fact that the airpark is downright beautiful helped, but it was really the great homeowners and fliers at the airpark that "sold" us. You won't find a more aircraft-friendly, or RV-friendly, bunch anywhere except maybe 52F, Hicks, Pecan Plantation, Stellar, Chino, etc., etc. . . . those airports and airparks simply have more RVs and RV pilots! Mogollon is working on producing and flying more RVs, but we can't compete with the "RV Hotspots" yet!

Well, Enough Said . . . I sincerely hope the negative comments in this forum will not deter those RVers who were thinking about flying into our EAA pancake breakfast . . . PLEASE FLY-IN AND TRESPASS ON JUNE 20th IF YOU CAN! Mogollon RV enthusiasts will be disappointed, and somewhat lonely, if you don't!

Best Regards to All,

Bill Palmer

[az_gila]

"The most significant problem was that the airpark's homeowners association was, and is, liable for airport operations and safety. For the EAA fly-in, EAA Chapter 1044 obtains insurance through the EAA. Otherwise, for all other days of the year, the homeowners association is responsible."

---------------------------

Check the EAA policy. It only protects the EAA Chapter, not the Airpark.

Guess how we found out...

We were sued because our runway was not up to FAA specifications... I'm sure you have a similar case.

[DeltaRomeo]

Thanks for the update and background, Bill.

b,
d

[Mike S]

Originally Posted by Louise Hose

Paul and I have recently started checking out potential airpark retirement homes in the southwest

I would like to extend an invite to check out Cameron Park.

We would love to have you here.

[Ironflight]

I really appreciate hearing the background Bill - thanks!

I'd still point out that the face you show the public on their first approach is how you are perceived. Some folks approach you first on the web (these days), and some don't. (I'd love to see the attorney's response when you ask "is a person required to look at the Home Page before landing, and if so - how do they know that?" I love baiting folks who haven't thought things through! )

I'm not out to bash anyone, and as I said in my previous post, I am sure that there are a lot of GREAT folks at Mogollon. I hope you take these thoughts as constructive - it might be that folks there simply don't realize the face that the rest of the public is seeing. All feedback is important if you want to improve something.

I still love the looks of your area - good luck with the pancake breakfast!

Paul

[az_gila]

Originally Posted by Ironflight

..... (I'd love to see the attorney's response when you ask "is a person required to look at the Home Page before landing, and if so - how do they know that?" I love baiting folks who haven't thought things through! ).....
Paul

....since the "official" record is here - the FAA 5010 airport database -

http://www.gcr1.com/5010web/airport.cfm?Site=AZ82

....and it's mentioned as "Private", but no mention of PPR on any of the pages. It probably should appear in the "Remarks" tab.

I guess the attorneys missed the "real" database...

Note that the "Remarks" of the FAA 5010 database is copied directly into the http://www.airnav.com/airport/az82 web page in this case - but apparently Airnav is not consistent in this.

Correction -

Airnav puts it here -

Airport use: Private use. Permission required prior to landing

- but PPR is still not on the 5010 database

[Louise Hose]

Originally Posted by az_gila

....since the "official" record is here - the FAA 5010 airport database -

http://www.gcr1.com/5010web/airport.cfm?Site=AZ82

....and it's mentioned as "Private", but no mention of PPR on any of the pages. It probably should appear in the "Remarks" tab.

I guess the attorneys missed the "real" database...

Yep. Interesting to note that the "official record" also clearly says that there is NO landing fee for non-commercial landings. I wonder how well Mogollon's $1000 fee would hold up in court? (Of course, that probably doesn't negate the potential tresspassing charge.)

I would like to think that this input might prompt the "Board of Directors" to revisit their decision to handle their problem with unwelcomed guest by their current methods. I loved living in Arizona and would like to put Mogollon back on the list.

[Bill Palmer]

Gil,

Thanks for the info. I checked about the insurance, and you're right. The airpark's insurance covers the fly-in as well as the EAA insurance. Also, the HOA will submit an update to the 5010.

Best Regards,

Bill Palmer