B

Bud Brewer

I'm New Here
This is my first post. I am an occasional reader, so forgive me if this topic has already been discussed. I have been surprised at the number of pilots that did not know this information.

The FAA has extensively revised airport rules. As of Septemeber 2009 no "trailerable" airplane can use airports that receive public money. This probably includes the RV-12. Also, it is illegal for any airplane to use mogas. Any airport manager should have a copy of these rules.

I called Van's this morning and Scott said they had learned of this only a week ago.
 
Got a source?

Where (specifically) can we see these new regs? I fly my Dakota Hawk (which has foldable wings and could be considered trailerable) with MoGas (Continental C-85 engine) out of Arlington KAWO. In addition, my RV-7 arrived at KAWO via flatbed trailer. Does that mean it's trailerable?

Arlington airport is stuffed full of General Aviation, Experimentals, Ultralights, Helicopters, and even a civilian "fighter jet" training facility. Seems airport management would be making noise about a rule like this.

Haven't heard anything about this at all.
 
I've seen this posted on AOPA and the PB. The actual rules are here, I believe:

http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/orders/compliance_5190_6/

So far as I can tell, this gives airports to *option* to implement some rules such as this (in some ways) but does NOT require them to do so. And not as black and white.

Just pointing to the information...I've read it, but its easy to miss the "meat" and would probably help to have other eyes on it. And best to read for yourself. (I've never heard where the OP of the other threads got their information. @Bud Brewer do you have a specific source for your post, or where in the linked manual should we look for these items you mention?)

EDIT: @lcnmrv8r, beat me to the submit button... ;) The link above is an HTML index vs. the full PDF in one file, so I'll leave it.
 
Last edited:
2009 Airport rules

Thank you Seth, Scott, and Rick for your input. The information came to me in a lengthy e-mail from the President of the Paso Robles Airport Association to the members of the PRAA.

My concerns were confirmed in a face to face meeting with the Paso Robles Airport Manager. He had the new rules manual on his desk. I confess to not having read the 600 plus pages, and hope feverntly that my sources were both wrong.
 
Garage Guy said:
The EAA's take on FAA Order 5190.6B:

http://www.eaa.org/news/2009/2009-10-15_rules.asp
Click to expand...

Once again, it is clear, the FAA has rammed another change down our throats. They modified the Airport Compliance Manual with a total disregard to public or user input. The manual went from 94 pages to 691 pages with no user input. Beside the obvious political ramifications, it is this heavy handed tactic the FAA revels in, and is well known for. Left unchecked, this is the same governmental agency that would just as soon do away with experimental aircraft all together. This is their goal, and this is a step towards that goal.

IMHO this needs a "call to action" by the EAA and we need to stop dead in it's' tracks, expose the FAA officials that were responsible for it being published, and have them disciplined and / or terminated.
 
Last edited:
Scott, I trusted bad information here in Paso Robles. I owe you an appology. My source hadn't actually read the rules.
Seth, Rick, and Garage Guy. Thank you all for helping return me to reliable souces and relieve fears about the future of my "12". In the words of the late Gilda Radner (aka Roseanna Roseanna Danna) "Never mind."
 
Bud Brewer said:
Scott, I trusted bad information here in Paso Robles. I owe you an appology. My source hadn't actually read the rules.
Seth, Rick, and Garage Guy. Thank you all for helping return me to reliable souces and relieve fears about the future of my "12". In the words of the late Gilda Radner (aka Roseanna Roseanna Danna) "Never mind."
Click to expand...

Bud,
Don't feel bad. This even happens all the time within the FAA it self. Not everyone within that agency interprets there own rules the same way (it will no doubt happen with this new document as well).

The issue you now have before you is educating the airport assoc. president you received the information from...you have your work cut out for you.
 
Dodged another one...

Looks like Recreational Aviation has dodged another bullet, but the machine gun is still blazing away! It seems only a matter of time before the revenue collectors figure out a way to tax or regulate us out of the air.

Eternal Vigilance!
 
This portion needs to be...

rvbuilder2002 said:
Bud,
.......
The issue you now have before you is educating the airport assoc. president you received the information from...you have your work cut out for you.
Click to expand...

..watched out for if you are a Mogas user --

b. Fuel Cooperative Organizations (CO-OPs). An airport sponsor is not required to permit a CO-OP to self-service. If a sponsor does permit CO-OPs to self-service, the CO-OP will have to observe the same minimum standards and rules and regulations applicable to all self-service activities. In addition, if self-fueling is allowed for CO-OPs, the sponsor may require the CO-OP to demonstrate joint ownership of the fuel tank and the fuel. The sponsor may also require the CO-OP to document that all personnel involved in fueling operations are adequately trained and that self-fueling is conducted only for that CO-OP business partner for which the employee actually works.
c. When an owner or operator obtains a certificate that authorizes it to fuel with automotive gasoline, also known as MoGas, the sponsor may impose the same rules and regulations on that owner or operator as it imposes on the airport's other self-service operations.

The airport can set the same standards for Mogas as for 100LL - inlcuding a fuel flowage fee. It could easily be seen by the Airport Operator that Mogas loses him $$$....:(
...and could be an easy argument for him to make on a safety basis once he talks to the town Fire Marshall.

From Chapter 11 --

http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/orders/compliance_5190_6/media/5190_6b_chap11.pdf
 
Geico266 said:
Once again, it is clear, the FAA has rammed another change down our throats. They modified the Airport Compliance Manual with a total disregard to public or user input. The manual went from 94 pages to 691 pages with no user input. Beside the obvious political ramifications, it is this heavy handed tactic the FAA revels in, and is well known for. Left unchecked, this is the same governmental agency that would just as soon do away with experimental aircraft all together. This is their goal, and this is a step towards that goal.

IMHO this needs a "call to action" by the EAA and we need to stop dead in it's' tracks, expose the FAA officials that were responsible for it being published, and have them disciplined and / or terminated.
Click to expand...

GEICO,GEICO,CEICO....
Tell us what you REALLY think!

Dick Jacobs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.