"bush flying" in the suburbs?

[[email protected]]

Among other aircraft I've been looking at the Zenith Air STOL CH 801
lately, which attracted my attention purely as an inexpensive and eaily
built plane to cart my family around. <http://www.zenithair.com>

But the advertised 390-ft fully-loaded ground roll got me fantasizing
about all the convenient places I could land with a STOL bush plane.
Somebody give me a reality check -- even in relatively densely
populated suburbs, there are a number of large open fields suitable for
a bush plane. As it happens there is one such within walking distance
of my parents' house in the northern D.C. suburbs, and there are other
flattish largish open spaces near other places I visit. Has anybody on
these newsgroups had any luck convincing random private landowners to
let them land on their unimproved property? Anybody even tried? Are
there likely to be local ordinances prohibiting intentional off-airport
landings in the suburbs? Lets just leave aside for the moment the
pesky little question of whether I'm qualified for this kind of
adventuring...

[C Kingsbury]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> But the advertised 390-ft fully-loaded ground roll got me fantasizing
> about all the convenient places I could land with a STOL bush plane.
> Somebody give me a reality check

Forget about it.

The first problem you have is the Washington DC ADIZ. Basically anything
within 30 nautical miles of DCA is *very* strictly controlled in terms of
arrivals and departures. Assuming you are within this ring there is no
chance you would be allowed to land and depart from anywhere except several
specially-designated fields and after a ton of other rigmarole.

But it is highly unlikely you'd ever get that far. First, there are enough
problems in suburbs with noise complaints coming from people who bought
houses built five years ago next to an airport that has been around since
the Wright bros. were still signing pilots' licenses. To get an idea of what
the world is coming to check out www.stopthenoise.org. This is up in Mass.,
which politically is pretty much the same crowd you get around the Beltway.

And the liability? Let's say your engine fails several hundred AGL on
takeoff. If you're really in the 'burbs then odds are good you're coming
down in a populated area. Whatever gets broken, that property owner whose
field you departed from is getting sued. Hopefully it's just somebody's
patio furniture and not something more difficult to replace.

As for the absolute legality of it, most populated areas have zoning boards
that exercise power approaching that of the Soviet Union. There are almost
certainly enough catch-alls in there to ensure that you would, at the very
least, have to spend a small fortune on lawyers in the process.

YMMV. Free advice is often worth every penny you pay for it.

-cwk.

[[email protected]]

Go for it. It's not as uncommon as you might think. I live in
Oklahoma City and a couple of guys around here have Super Cubs or
Maules that they go goof around in. Within a very short flight most
cities there are vast areas of undeveloped land you can land a bush
plane on. Here we have two rivers with beautiful smooth sand bars,
several motor vehicle recreation areas and myriad fields.

A couple of years ago we had a guy in a Maule land in a field to drop
his son off at baseball practice at one of our high schools. The local
news station sent a truck out to cover the "crash." I think someone
called the fire department and they came out to watch him take back off
again. It's been a few years, but I think one of the news stations
interviewed the local police department who confirmed that there is
nothing illegal about landing an airplane in a field (duh).

However, check your local laws, most states have some rules about using
public roads as your own personal airstrip.

I landed in a field once to stop and talk to a land owner. We plopped
down next to his pickup truck and chatted for a while. Not really as
big a deal as you might think.


wrote:
> Among other aircraft I've been looking at the Zenith Air STOL CH 801
> lately, which attracted my attention purely as an inexpensive and
eaily
> built plane to cart my family around. <http://www.zenithair.com>
>
> But the advertised 390-ft fully-loaded ground roll got me fantasizing
> about all the convenient places I could land with a STOL bush plane.
> Somebody give me a reality check -- even in relatively densely
> populated suburbs, there are a number of large open fields suitable
for
> a bush plane. As it happens there is one such within walking
distance
> of my parents' house in the northern D.C. suburbs, and there are
other
> flattish largish open spaces near other places I visit. Has anybody
on
> these newsgroups had any luck convincing random private landowners to
> let them land on their unimproved property? Anybody even tried? Are
> there likely to be local ordinances prohibiting intentional
off-airport
> landings in the suburbs? Lets just leave aside for the moment the
> pesky little question of whether I'm qualified for this kind of
> adventuring...

[Newps]

wrote:

>
> However, check your local laws, most states have some rules about using
> public roads as your own personal airstrip.

Yep, here in Montana it is legal to land on roads. See this months
AOPA, page 62 for what happens when you don't do it right.

[[email protected]]

> The first problem you have is the Washington DC ADIZ
Hm, shoots that idea down....

[zatatime]

On 6 Dec 2004 21:07:51 -0800, wrote:

>Are
>there likely to be local ordinances prohibiting intentional off-airport
>landings in the suburbs?

In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,
which puts the kabosh on your plan for this state. However in PA and
NY you can land anywhere you want with prior permission from the
owner. I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
a small field in town, and someone else who'd take their 180 up to NY
and land on his buddies farm.

Milage varies from state to state.
z

[Newps]

zatatime wrote:

>
>
> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,
> which puts the kabosh on your plan for this state. However in PA and
> NY you can land anywhere you want with prior permission from the
> owner. I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
> a small field in town, and someone else who'd take their 180 up to NY
> and land on his buddies farm.

Around here we spend more time in the dirt than on pavement. Are you
saying that in NJ if I own some acerage I can't use it to land on
without the state giving me some kind of approval?

[ShawnD2112]

That's how flying ought to be. It shouldn't be any more complicated than a
drive in the country or taking a tractor out on the field.

Shawn
> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Go for it. It's not as uncommon as you might think. I live in
> Oklahoma City and a couple of guys around here have Super Cubs or
> Maules that they go goof around in. Within a very short flight most
> cities there are vast areas of undeveloped land you can land a bush
> plane on. Here we have two rivers with beautiful smooth sand bars,
> several motor vehicle recreation areas and myriad fields.
>
> A couple of years ago we had a guy in a Maule land in a field to drop
> his son off at baseball practice at one of our high schools. The local
> news station sent a truck out to cover the "crash." I think someone
> called the fire department and they came out to watch him take back off
> again. It's been a few years, but I think one of the news stations
> interviewed the local police department who confirmed that there is
> nothing illegal about landing an airplane in a field (duh).
>
> However, check your local laws, most states have some rules about using
> public roads as your own personal airstrip.
>
> I landed in a field once to stop and talk to a land owner. We plopped
> down next to his pickup truck and chatted for a while. Not really as
> big a deal as you might think.
>
>
> wrote:
>> Among other aircraft I've been looking at the Zenith Air STOL CH 801
>> lately, which attracted my attention purely as an inexpensive and
> eaily
>> built plane to cart my family around. <http://www.zenithair.com>
>>
>> But the advertised 390-ft fully-loaded ground roll got me fantasizing
>> about all the convenient places I could land with a STOL bush plane.
>> Somebody give me a reality check -- even in relatively densely
>> populated suburbs, there are a number of large open fields suitable
> for
>> a bush plane. As it happens there is one such within walking
> distance
>> of my parents' house in the northern D.C. suburbs, and there are
> other
>> flattish largish open spaces near other places I visit. Has anybody
> on
>> these newsgroups had any luck convincing random private landowners to
>> let them land on their unimproved property? Anybody even tried? Are
>> there likely to be local ordinances prohibiting intentional
> off-airport
>> landings in the suburbs? Lets just leave aside for the moment the
>> pesky little question of whether I'm qualified for this kind of
>> adventuring...
>

[Rich S.]

"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
>
> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,. . .

Define "approved", sil vous plait.

Rich S.

[Gig Giacona]

"Rich S." > wrote in message
...
> "zatatime" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,. . .
>
> Define "approved", sil vous plait.
>
> Rich S.
>

NJ Statues


6:1-2. Definitions
As used in this chapter:

" Aircraft " means any contrivance invented, used or designed for
navigation or flight in the air except a parachute or other contrivance
designed for such navigation but used primarily as safety equipment.

"Airman" means any person who engages in the navigation or direction
of aircraft while under way.

"Airport" means any locality, either of land or water, which is used
for the landing or taking off of aircraft and which meets the requirements
for a rating by the United States department of commerce.

"Commission" means the state aviation commission.

"Director" means the state director of aviation.

"Landing field" means any locality, either of land or water, which is
used for the landing or taking off of aircraft and which does not meet the
requirements for a rating by the United States department of commerce.

6:1-15. Licensing of airports and landing fields
No owner or operator of any airport or landing field shall permit the
owner or pilot of any aircraft to use such airport or landing field for
landing or taking off while engaged in carrying passengers for hire or
reward or instructing students for hire or reward, unless such owner or
operator of the airport or landing field has been granted a license or
temporary letter of authority from the commission for such operation.

No owner or pilot of aircraft shall carry any passengers for hire or
reward from any airport or landing field in this state, unless such airport
or landing field has been granted a license or temporary letter of
authority from the commission for the type of operation to be engaged in.


6:1-43. Use of emergency facility or facility operated exclusively by and
for government; license for aeronautical activity; fixed base operation
It shall be unlawful, except as provided for by the provisions of this
chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted pursuant to this
chapter, to operate, use, or cause to be operated or used any avigation
facility intended to accommodate the operation, take-off, or landing of
aircraft , except in the case of emergency or at avigation facilities owned
and operated exclusively by and for the Government of the United States. No
aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
purposes. It shall be further unlawful to operate or allow to be operated
without proper license any aeronautical activity-fixed base operation that
is required to be licensed by the provisions of this chapter or the rules,
regulations and orders issued pursuant to this chapter in the interests of
the public health, safety and welfare.

6:1-44. Licenses; aviation facilities and temporary landing areas
The commissioner shall provide for the licensing of airports, landing
strips, or other avigation facilities and temporary landing areas by rules,
regulations and orders adequate to protect the public health and safety and
the safety of those participating in aeronautical activities; provided,
however, that the continued use and operation of airports, landing strips,
and other avigation facilities, in use and operation on the effective date
of this chapter, for which an application for a license shall have been
filed within the time fixed by the commissioner, shall be permitted,
pending the granting or rejection of such applications; and provided
further, that the application for a license for any airport, landing strip,
or other avigation facility in use and operation on the effective date of
this chapter shall be granted, unless the commissioner shall find that such
airports, landing strips, or other avigation facilities are not
constructed, equipped and operated in accordance with the standards and
requirements fixed by the rules, regulations and orders of the
commissioner. Whenever the commissioner or the Director of Aeronautics
shall reject any application for license under the provisions of this
section, he shall state in writing the reasons for such rejection.

The commissioner may further determine it necessary and provide for the
licensing of specific aeronautical activities, fixed base operations, or
persons engaged in specific types of aeronautical activities, or operations
by rules, regulations and orders adequate to protect the public health,
safety and welfare and the safety of those participating in aeronautics.

[PJ Hunt]

"Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@> wrote

> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,. . .
> NJ Statues
>
>
> 6:1-2. Definitions
> As used in this chapter:

> landing or taking off while engaged in carrying passengers for hire or
> reward or instructing students for hire or reward

This statute applies to commercial operations.

So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge them
or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
with the land owner first.

PJ

--

============================================
Here's to the duck who swam a lake and never lost a feather,
May sometime another year, we all be back together.
JJW
============================================

in message ...
>
> "Rich S." > wrote in message
> ...
> > "zatatime" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >
> > Define "approved", sil vous plait.
> >
> > Rich S.
> >
>
> NJ Statues
>
>
> 6:1-2. Definitions
> As used in this chapter:
>
> " Aircraft " means any contrivance invented, used or designed for
> navigation or flight in the air except a parachute or other contrivance
> designed for such navigation but used primarily as safety equipment.
>
> "Airman" means any person who engages in the navigation or direction
> of aircraft while under way.
>
> "Airport" means any locality, either of land or water, which is used
> for the landing or taking off of aircraft and which meets the requirements
> for a rating by the United States department of commerce.
>
> "Commission" means the state aviation commission.
>
> "Director" means the state director of aviation.
>
> "Landing field" means any locality, either of land or water, which
is
> used for the landing or taking off of aircraft and which does not meet
the
> requirements for a rating by the United States department of commerce.
>
> 6:1-15. Licensing of airports and landing fields
> No owner or operator of any airport or landing field shall permit the
> owner or pilot of any aircraft to use such airport or landing field for
> landing or taking off while engaged in carrying passengers for hire or
> reward or instructing students for hire or reward, unless such owner or
> operator of the airport or landing field has been granted a license or
> temporary letter of authority from the commission for such operation.
>
> No owner or pilot of aircraft shall carry any passengers for hire or
> reward from any airport or landing field in this state, unless such
airport
> or landing field has been granted a license or temporary letter of
> authority from the commission for the type of operation to be engaged in.
>
>
> 6:1-43. Use of emergency facility or facility operated exclusively by and
> for government; license for aeronautical activity; fixed base operation
> It shall be unlawful, except as provided for by the provisions of this
> chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted pursuant to this
> chapter, to operate, use, or cause to be operated or used any avigation
> facility intended to accommodate the operation, take-off, or landing of
> aircraft , except in the case of emergency or at avigation facilities
owned
> and operated exclusively by and for the Government of the United States.
No
> aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
> or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
> declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
> purposes. It shall be further unlawful to operate or allow to be
operated
> without proper license any aeronautical activity-fixed base operation
that
> is required to be licensed by the provisions of this chapter or the
rules,
> regulations and orders issued pursuant to this chapter in the interests
of
> the public health, safety and welfare.
>
> 6:1-44. Licenses; aviation facilities and temporary landing areas
> The commissioner shall provide for the licensing of airports, landing
> strips, or other avigation facilities and temporary landing areas by
rules,
> regulations and orders adequate to protect the public health and safety
and
> the safety of those participating in aeronautical activities; provided,
> however, that the continued use and operation of airports, landing
strips,
> and other avigation facilities, in use and operation on the effective
date
> of this chapter, for which an application for a license shall have been
> filed within the time fixed by the commissioner, shall be permitted,
> pending the granting or rejection of such applications; and provided
> further, that the application for a license for any airport, landing
strip,
> or other avigation facility in use and operation on the effective date of
> this chapter shall be granted, unless the commissioner shall find that
such
> airports, landing strips, or other avigation facilities are not
> constructed, equipped and operated in accordance with the standards and
> requirements fixed by the rules, regulations and orders of the
> commissioner. Whenever the commissioner or the Director of Aeronautics
> shall reject any application for license under the provisions of this
> section, he shall state in writing the reasons for such rejection.
>
> The commissioner may further determine it necessary and provide for
the
> licensing of specific aeronautical activities, fixed base operations, or
> persons engaged in specific types of aeronautical activities, or
operations
> by rules, regulations and orders adequate to protect the public health,
> safety and welfare and the safety of those participating in aeronautics.
>
>
>
>

[zatatime]

On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:14:03 -0800, "Rich S."
> wrote:

>"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,. . .
>
>Define "approved", sil vous plait.
>
>Rich S.
>

You'd have to check with the State DOT for a true definition, but the
working definition is any designated public or private heliport, or
airport within the state.

HTH.
z

[zatatime]

On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:32:57 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
> wrote:

>6:1-43 No
>aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
>or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
>declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
>purposes.


Thanks.
z

[Rich S.]

"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
>
> You'd have to check with the State DOT for a true definition, but the
> working definition is any designated public or private heliport, or
> airport within the state.

As with the word "approved" - your definition just substitutes the word
"designated". In order to be meaningful, one needs to know how, by whom and
by what authority. I read Gia's excerpts and it's clear that the NJ state
government has usurped the Federal authority in this area - not that this is
anything new for a state government.

We have much the same type of ordinance in the area I live. A few years ago,
the county decided the sheriff's deputies were getting confused about the
"No Shooting" boundaries and found it difficult to enforce. So, they just
made the whole area out of bounds. If one reads the wording though, it
allows shooting in "designated shooting ranges". They failed to define what
constitutes a shooting range and didn't set up procedures for designation. I
think I have a sign on the property someplace that warns trespassers they
are entering a designated shooting range.

I hate beanery lawyers, but sometimes the stupidity of municipal, county,
state and federal burrocrats leaves one no choice. Most times, the wording
of the law makes little difference when it comes time to go to court. The
judge will interpret however he/she wants.

None of the above should be construed as criticism of any of our wonderful
appointed or elected officials.

Rich "Toe the line" S.

[[email protected]]

Gig Giacona wrote:
> "Rich S." > wrote in message
> ...
> > "zatatime" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing
facility,. . .
> >
> > Define "approved", sil vous plait.
> >
> > Rich S.
> >
>
> NJ Statues

["No, no, no, no, and no" snipped]

How depressing. Nice that they define aircraft and airman, but not
avigation.

How are local anti-aviation laws enforced against out-of-state pilots?
(Besides calling out the Air Force....) Does the FAA honor states'
requests to punish errant pilots? It seems like it would be very easy
for a non-local pilot to be unaware of local law, and of course
residents are not generally going to know about state aviation law
either.

[[email protected]]

Gig Giacona wrote:
> "Rich S." > wrote in message
> ...
> > "zatatime" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing
facility,. . .
> >
> > Define "approved", sil vous plait.
> >
> > Rich S.
> >
>
> NJ Statues

["No, no, no, no, and no" snipped]

How depressing. Nice that they define aircraft and airman, but not
avigation.

How are local anti-aviation laws enforced against out-of-state pilots?
(Besides calling out the Air Force....) Does the FAA honor states'
requests to punish errant pilots? It seems like it would be very easy
for a non-local pilot to be unaware of local law, and of course
residents are not generally going to know about state aviation law
either.

[alexy]

"Rich S." > wrote:


>it's clear that the NJ state
>government has usurped the Federal authority in this area - not that this is
>anything new for a state government.

I'm not sure how clear that is. Isn't there something in the US
Constitution relegating to the states any powers not specifically
reserved to the federal gov't? AFAIK, land use falls into that
category, so is not usurpation of federal authority.

PS I'm not saying that the NJ law doesn't suck -- just that it is
within their powers if that's what the people of the Garden State
want.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Blueskies]

> wrote in message ups.com...
>> The first problem you have is the Washington DC ADIZ
> Hm, shoots that idea down....
>

I hope we don't give up 'our' airspace that easily...

What do the helicopter folks do?

[Blueskies]

A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?

[Rich S.]

X-No-Archive: Yes
"alexy" > wrote in message
...
>
> I'm not sure how clear that is. Isn't there something in the US
> Constitution relegating to the states any powers not specifically
> reserved to the federal gov't? AFAIK, land use falls into that
> category, so is not usurpation of federal authority.
>
> PS I'm not saying that the NJ law doesn't suck -- just that it is
> within their powers if that's what the people of the Garden State
> want.

Article One, Section Eight, Clause Three of the U.S. Constitution states the
Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,
and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;". This interstate
commerce clause has been widely upheld by the Supreme Court and specifically
has given the Federal Government the exclusive power to regulate aviation.
(It's the same authority the Feds used to give us a 55 mph speed limit on
roads designed for much higher speeds).

Gradually however, the states have shuffled their noses under the tent of
the FAA and NTSB; taxing and regulating aviation activities and pilots. In
Washington state for example, pilots must have a state pilot's license
unless ALL of their flying is done interstate for a commercial carrier or
for the military. Aircraft owners must also register their aircraft with the
state and pay fees for the privilege.

Regulating the use of private or public land as landing strips is just
another backdoor method of regulating aviation. It is similar to recognizing
the right to keep and bear arms and then regulating ammunition or making it
illegal to discharge a firearm. Lawmakers always know more than one way to
skin a cat.

If any of the above is in error, it was written by my evil twin and given to
me in a dream.

Rich S.

[Peter]

Rich S. wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> "alexy" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I'm not sure how clear that is. Isn't there something in the US
>>Constitution relegating to the states any powers not specifically
>>reserved to the federal gov't? AFAIK, land use falls into that
>>category, so is not usurpation of federal authority.
>>
>>PS I'm not saying that the NJ law doesn't suck -- just that it is
>>within their powers if that's what the people of the Garden State
>>want.
>
>
> Article One, Section Eight, Clause Three of the U.S. Constitution states the
> Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,
> and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;". This interstate
> commerce clause has been widely upheld by the Supreme Court and specifically
> has given the Federal Government the exclusive power to regulate aviation.
> (It's the same authority the Feds used to give us a 55 mph speed limit on
> roads designed for much higher speeds).

No, technically there never was a federal speed limit of 55 mph. The
law just specified that in order to qualify for federal transportation
funds each state had to pass and enforce a 55 mph speed limit. Of
course in practice this amounted to the same thing since no state
wanted to give up its fair share of those funds (coming from their
own residents). But it was done this way specifically because the
federal government did not have the authority to directly specify
speed limits within the individual states.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/invntory/envspoms.txt :
"The 55 mph national speed limit was introduced January 1,
1974 in response to the OPEC oil embargo and subsequent "energy
crisis." While this speed limit was not mandated by the Federal
Government, highway funding was linked to adoption of this
speed limit, and its enforcement, by the States."

[Blueskies]

"Peter" > wrote in message ...
<snip>
>
> http://www.epa.gov/otaq/invntory/envspoms.txt :
> "The 55 mph national speed limit was introduced January 1,
> 1974 in response to the OPEC oil embargo and subsequent "energy
> crisis." While this speed limit was not mandated by the Federal
> Government, highway funding was linked to adoption of this
> speed limit, and its enforcement, by the States."
>

Just like the DWI and exhaust emissions laws...

[Blueskies]

"Rich S." > wrote in message ...
<snip>
> Gradually however, the states have shuffled their noses under the tent of the FAA and NTSB; taxing and regulating
> aviation activities and pilots. In Washington state for example, pilots must have a state pilot's license unless ALL
> of their flying is done interstate for a commercial carrier or for the military. Aircraft owners must also register
> their aircraft with the state and pay fees for the privilege.
>

Does this mean that if you do all of your flying 'in state' you don't need a license from the FAA?

[Rich S.]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Does this mean that if you do all of your flying 'in state' you don't need
> a license from the FAA?

Without being picky over the term "license", it does not mean that. You
needs both of 'em. And mebbe a driver's license, too. And a note from your
Mom.

Rich S.

[zatatime]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:19:40 GMT, "Blueskies"
> wrote:

>A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?
>
Again, I do not have the specific documentation, but in a nutshell, if
it's for private use, you need to adhere to all the State DOT regs
pertaining to Private Use Airports. If it's for public use, you need
to comply with those requirements, i.e. Airport Safety Zone, 7 to 1
glide ratio to a certain distance away from the runway, lighting as
applicable, etc...

I know someone who did this for a heliport in Northern NJ, it took
quite a while, and cost a bunch of money.

HTH.
z

[Mike Rapoport]

"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:19:40 GMT, "Blueskies"
> > wrote:
>
>>A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?
>>
> Again, I do not have the specific documentation, but in a nutshell, if
> it's for private use, you need to adhere to all the State DOT regs
> pertaining to Private Use Airports. If it's for public use, you need
> to comply with those requirements, i.e. Airport Safety Zone, 7 to 1
> glide ratio to a certain distance away from the runway, lighting as
> applicable, etc...
>
> I know someone who did this for a heliport in Northern NJ, it took
> quite a while, and cost a bunch of money.
>
> HTH.
> z

Here in ID, your runway has to be 2000' from the nearest neighbor to get
approval for a new airstrip. In practice, this takes quite a bit of land,
hundreds of acres.

Mike
MU-2

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:26:01 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote in
t>::

>Here in ID, your runway has to be 2000' from the nearest neighbor to get
>approval for a new airstrip. In practice, this takes quite a bit of land,
>hundreds of acres.

For a 2,000' runway that would require ~555 acres minimum.

[C Kingsbury]

Donating a few thousand to the governor's campaign slush fund would probably
be a good place to start. Seems to work for most other things in that place.

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
om...
> A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?
>
>

[Rich S.]

"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> No, technically there never was a federal speed limit of 55 mph. The
> law just specified that in order to qualify for federal transportation
> funds each state had to pass and enforce a 55 mph speed limit. Of
> course in practice this amounted to the same thing since no state
> wanted to give up its fair share of those funds (coming from their
> own residents). But it was done this way specifically because the
> federal government did not have the authority to directly specify
> speed limits within the individual states.

Now *that* would be more accurate than my drivel...

Rich S.

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:26:01 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote:

>
>"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:19:40 GMT, "Blueskies"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?
>>>
>> Again, I do not have the specific documentation, but in a nutshell, if
>> it's for private use, you need to adhere to all the State DOT regs
>> pertaining to Private Use Airports. If it's for public use, you need
>> to comply with those requirements, i.e. Airport Safety Zone, 7 to 1
>> glide ratio to a certain distance away from the runway, lighting as
>> applicable, etc...
>>
>> I know someone who did this for a heliport in Northern NJ, it took
>> quite a while, and cost a bunch of money.
>>
>> HTH.
>> z
>
>Here in ID, your runway has to be 2000' from the nearest neighbor to get
>approval for a new airstrip. In practice, this takes quite a bit of land,
>hundreds of acres.
>
>Mike
>MU-2
>
>
Wow sucks to be you guys. In Canada we can pretty much land and take
off wherever we please

[[email protected]]

I fly one every day and it is a kool bird for short fields. Out here in
Jackson Hole Wy, the places are unlimited for landing spots.
Ben Haas N801BH

[Larry Dighera]

On 7 Dec 2004 23:28:53 -0800, wrote in
. com>::

>I fly one every day and it is a kool bird for short fields. Out here in
>Jackson Hole Wy, the places are unlimited for landing spots.
>Ben Haas N801BH

I wonder what the gross, useful, and payload weights might be?

[Judah]

zatatime > wrote in
:

<snip>
> I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
> a small field in town,

Cool! I didn't realize Santa had a Chauffer.

I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
don't cut it anymore...

[C Kingsbury]

"Drew Dalgleish" > wrote in message
...
> >
> Wow sucks to be you guys. In Canada we can pretty much land and take
> off wherever we please

Benefits of having a country the size of the lower 48 but the population of
New York.

-cwk.

[Peter Duniho]

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
>> I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
>> a small field in town,
>
> [...]
> I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
> don't cut it anymore...

Didn't you hear? He had to switch to something else, 'cause the reindeer
kept burning up from the air friction.

[[email protected]]

Peter Duniho on Dec 8, 9:05 am wrote:


"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..Peter Duniho Dec
8, 9:05 am show options
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: "Peter Duniho" >
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:05:14 -0800
Local: Wed, Dec 8 2004 9:05 am
Subject: Re: "bush flying" in the suburbs?
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..

>> I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
>> a small field in town,

> [...]

> I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
> don't cut it anymore...

Didn't you hear? He had to switch to something else, 'cause the
reindeer
kept burning up from the air friction.
> [...]

> I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
> don't cut it anymore...

Didn't you hear? He had to switch to something else, 'cause the
reindeer
kept burning up from the air friction.


*** REply ****

I thought it was because the reindeer flatulence was doing in the
ozone.

--

FF

[Corky Scott]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:24:15 GMT, Larry Dighera >
wrote:

>On 7 Dec 2004 23:28:53 -0800, wrote in
. com>::
>
>>I fly one every day and it is a kool bird for short fields. Out here in
>>Jackson Hole Wy, the places are unlimited for landing spots.
>>Ben Haas N801BH
>
>I wonder what the gross, useful, and payload weights might be?

Ben's Zenith is a bit out of the ordinary in a world where STOL's are
already off the beaten path. He has a lot of experience in racing,
and bolted an aluminum block V-8 to his firewall. He has a bit more
power than the Rotax powered Zenith's.

Corky Scott

[[email protected]]

PJ Hunt on Dec 7, 3:04 pm wrote:


"Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@> wrote

> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,.
.. .
> NJ Statues

> 6:1-2. Definitions
> As used in this chapter:
> landing or taking off while engaged in carrying passengers for hire
or
> reward or instructing students for hire or reward

This statute applies to commercial operations.

So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge
them
or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
with the land owner first.

**** Reply ***

That is what I thought at first too. However the section dealing with
emergency landings appears to prohibit, without regard to com-
mercial operation, non-emergency landings at non-licecensed fields.
But maybe I need to read it again 2-3 more times.

--

FF

[Slip'er]

Yes. Santa's sleigh is for sale on ASO! I sent a message asking whether
the red G-suit came with the sleigh, as an 8+1 reindeer powered sleigh has
serious G-forces on take-off. The seller replied:

Thank you for your interest in the sleigh. Since Santa is very busy

this time of year, I'm helping him with the sale of his pre-owned

sleigh.

Excellent question. Mrs. Claus is the sole supplier of Santa's red,

fur lined, soot resistant G-Suit with a built in auto heater. Due

to Santa's ever-increasing waistline (too many cookies), Mrs. Claus

is constantly making new suits for him. As every suit requires a

tremendous amount of labor, she unfortunately would not be able to

supply the sleigh buyer with one. She recommended checking with NASA for a
similar version.

Please let us know if you have any further questions and have a

wonderful holiday season!

Best regards,

The Honorary Elves at ASO

Carl Hixon wrote:

>

> A I R C R A F T S H O P P E R O N L I N E S A L E S L E A D

>

> To: Claus Craft Corporation

> Aircraft: 2004 - Santa's Sleigh (SCLAUSE)

>

> From: Carl Hixon

> Telephone: 858-967-8712 (Daytime)

> E-Mail:

> Location: US

>

> Buyer rates self as: Definitely Buying

> Purchase Time Frame: 1 - 12 months

> Budget Minimum: $0000 Maximum: $50000

>

> -------------------- Message --------------------

> Does the Sleigh come with the red G-suit required to safely pilot an

> 8+1 reindeer configured sleigh? I am unaware of a private source for

> said suit and fear blackout upon takeoff.

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> ASO Message ID 386574 ASO Ad number 86820

>

> Please contact us if you have difficulty reaching this buyer.

>

> E-Mail: FAX: (415) 927-9441 Phone: (415) 927-2255

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
> zatatime > wrote in
> :
>
> <snip>
> > I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
> > a small field in town,
>
> Cool! I didn't realize Santa had a Chauffer.
>
> I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
> don't cut it anymore...

[Blueskies]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "Drew Dalgleish" > wrote in message
> ...
>> >
>> Wow sucks to be you guys. In Canada we can pretty much land and take
>> off wherever we please
>
> Benefits of having a country the size of the lower 48 but the population of
> New York.
>
> -cwk.
>
>

So much for Freedom, eh?

[G.R. Patterson III]

wrote:
>
> But maybe I need to read it again 2-3 more times.

Probably. You seem to have missed the words "operated exclusively by and for
government" in that section.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[G.R. Patterson III]

PJ Hunt wrote:
>
> This statute applies to commercial operations.
>
> So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge them
> or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
> permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
> with the land owner first.

Rich asked for a definition of "approved". That's what Gig provided. The section
he quoted does prohibit commercial operations, but no claim has been made that
that's the entire law in New Jersey. Perhaps "zatatime" can provide a reference
to the statute that prohibits other operations?

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Newps]

So all this bitching going on the last few years over GA losing its
rights out East and all along this was on the books? Cry me a river.




zatatime wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:32:57 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>6:1-43 No
>>aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
>>or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
>>declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
>>purposes.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
> z

[Newps]

We have a guy here that has a 1500 pound thing he hangs from his
Jetranger each Christmas. It is Santa in his sleigh and a couple of
reindeer. There's about a thousand lights being run from the generator
bungied to the skids. He flies without any lights on the copter and the
route is published in the paper on Dec 23 each year. His whole flight
takes him a couple hours.




Judah wrote:

> zatatime > wrote in
> :
>
> <snip>
>
>>I used to know a helicopter pilot who flew Santa in and out of
>>a small field in town,
>
>
> Cool! I didn't realize Santa had a Chauffer.
>
> I guess as the world gets more and more populated, the Reindeer just
> don't cut it anymore...

[Matt Whiting]

Drew Dalgleish wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:26:01 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>"zatatime" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:19:40 GMT, "Blueskies"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>A 'proper license' should not be too hard to come by. How do you get one?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Again, I do not have the specific documentation, but in a nutshell, if
>>>it's for private use, you need to adhere to all the State DOT regs
>>>pertaining to Private Use Airports. If it's for public use, you need
>>>to comply with those requirements, i.e. Airport Safety Zone, 7 to 1
>>>glide ratio to a certain distance away from the runway, lighting as
>>>applicable, etc...
>>>
>>>I know someone who did this for a heliport in Northern NJ, it took
>>>quite a while, and cost a bunch of money.
>>>
>>>HTH.
>>>z
>>
>>Here in ID, your runway has to be 2000' from the nearest neighbor to get
>>approval for a new airstrip. In practice, this takes quite a bit of land,
>>hundreds of acres.
>>
>>Mike
>>MU-2
>>
>>
>
> Wow sucks to be you guys. In Canada we can pretty much land and take
> off wherever we please

Just because not enough people want to live in Canada to provide
neighbors within 2000 feet is no reason to get arrogant! :-)

Matt

[G.R. Patterson III]

zatatime wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 13:32:57 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
> > wrote:
>
> >6:1-43 No
> >aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
> >or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
> >declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
> >purposes.

You've cut out the part that says this applies only to fields "operated
exclusively by and for government".

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[[email protected]]

G.R. Patterson III wrote:
> wrote:
> >
> > But maybe I need to read it again 2-3 more times.
>
> Probably. You seem to have missed the words "operated exclusively by
and for
> government" in that section.
>

I saw the preceding word "or" just fine.

The bottom line is most likely to be found in the
exceptions "as provided for by the provisions of this
chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted
pursuant to this chapter,"

which one supposes could exempt private property
used with the owners permission, or not.

--

FF

[Brian Burger]

On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, C Kingsbury wrote:

>
> "Drew Dalgleish" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >
> > Wow sucks to be you guys. In Canada we can pretty much land and take
> > off wherever we please
>
> Benefits of having a country the size of the lower 48 but the population of
> New York.

Bigger than the lower 48, actually, by a fair bit. Only Russia is bigger,
by land area... (even after the USSR spun off the Ukraine, the 'stans, and
stuff, Russia is still bigger!)

Brian.
www.warbard.ca/avgas/index.html

[zatatime]

On 8 Dec 2004 09:50:03 -0800, wrote:

>PJ Hunt on Dec 7, 3:04 pm wrote:
>
>
>"Gig Giacona" <wr.giacona@> wrote
>
>> In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,.
>. .
>> NJ Statues
>
>> 6:1-2. Definitions
>> As used in this chapter:
>> landing or taking off while engaged in carrying passengers for hire
>or
>> reward or instructing students for hire or reward
>
>This statute applies to commercial operations.
>
>So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge
>them
>or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
>permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
>with the land owner first.
>
>**** Reply ***
>
>That is what I thought at first too. However the section dealing with
>emergency landings appears to prohibit, without regard to com-
>mercial operation, non-emergency landings at non-licecensed fields.
>But maybe I need to read it again 2-3 more times.

You are correct. Neat how they sneak that in there isn't it?

z

[zatatime]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:19:42 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>PJ Hunt wrote:
>>
>> This statute applies to commercial operations.
>>
>> So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge them
>> or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
>> permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
>> with the land owner first.
>
>Rich asked for a definition of "approved". That's what Gig provided. The section
>he quoted does prohibit commercial operations, but no claim has been made that
>that's the entire law in New Jersey. Perhaps "zatatime" can provide a reference
>to the statute that prohibits other operations?
>
>George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.


This is snipped from what was posted and seems to me to cover the
issue.

>No
> aircraft or airman shall utilize, land, or take off from any area of land
> or water, unless that area is licensed for such activity, or found and
> declared by the commissioner to be vital or necessary for avigation
> purposes.

If this does not cover the issue, I'll try to find time to call the
State DOT for clarification of what statute applies. I only know from
practical knowledge that it is not allowed.

HTH.
z

[G.R. Patterson III]

zatatime wrote:
>
> If this does not cover the issue, I'll try to find time to call the
> State DOT for clarification of what statute applies. I only know from
> practical knowledge that it is not allowed.

I'm probably reading it wrong.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[zatatime]

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 01:52:31 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>zatatime wrote:
>>
>> If this does not cover the issue, I'll try to find time to call the
>> State DOT for clarification of what statute applies. I only know from
>> practical knowledge that it is not allowed.
>
>I'm probably reading it wrong.
>
>George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

Not too sure about that. I did miss the "government" comment
preceeding my snip. No promises, but I'll try to follow up to get the
reg #.

z

[Ernest Christley]

wrote:
> Among other aircraft I've been looking at the Zenith Air STOL CH 801
> lately, which attracted my attention purely as an inexpensive and eaily
> built plane to cart my family around. <http://www.zenithair.com>
>
> But the advertised 390-ft fully-loaded ground roll got me fantasizing
> about all the convenient places I could land with a STOL bush plane.
> Somebody give me a reality check -- even in relatively densely
> populated suburbs, there are a number of large open fields suitable for
> a bush plane. As it happens there is one such within walking distance
> of my parents' house in the northern D.C. suburbs, and there are other
> flattish largish open spaces near other places I visit. Has anybody on
> these newsgroups had any luck convincing random private landowners to
> let them land on their unimproved property? Anybody even tried? Are
> there likely to be local ordinances prohibiting intentional off-airport
> landings in the suburbs? Lets just leave aside for the moment the
> pesky little question of whether I'm qualified for this kind of
> adventuring...
>


Don't the federal regulation forbid dropping under 500ft AGL over
someone else's property? I think the law is that anything below 500 is
the airspace of the private property owner (trying to remember the
details of an AOPA article I read a LONG time ago), and you would be
hard pressed to land anywhere in a suburb without crossing low over
someone who would take issue.

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

[Casey Wilson]

Several years ago, when I lived in the north end of San Bernardino,
California, my father-in-law used to land on a concrete slab left over from
a WWII Army supply depot. It was about a mile and a half from the house,
just of the east side of Interstate-15 We had scoped the place out, cleared
some brush, and sunk some anchors for tie downs. He lived and flew in Alaska
and the plane was a C-170B with big flaps and huge mains.
Pop would fly over the house and rack the throttle a couple times to get
my attention, then head for the patch. By the time I got there he'd be
tieing the plane down.
One late evening, right at twilight, we went through the drill. I helped
him finish up the tie-downs and just as we started to unload... Headlights,
spotlights, and cops -- sheriff, Highway patrol, city cops, and we found out
in a few minutes the FBI and DEA -- appeared from every direction!
Fortunately, none of them unholstered their pistols but a few had
shotguns pointed in the air. One guy, turned out to be DEA, asked Pop if
they could look in the airplane. I almost wet myself when the old man
answered, "Not unless you tell me what you think you're looking for." After
about ten minutes of hassling back and forth... Pop was a hard-core
conservative, if you haven't figured that out yet... he opened the door and
let them inspect his cargo. He was even polite enough to warn them that his
30.06 and 44Mag were hot loaded, as was his Armalite folded rifle that was
wrapped up in his parka. He was actually bluffing about that. He never
carried the guns loaded in the airplane.
Somebody in the neighborhood alerted the cops. Surely we had to be
smuggling something. Especially when the busybody watched us carry all the
gear out of the airplane and stuff it into the Wagoneer. Especially when
they saw the .06 in the open.
Then, came my turn. The DEA guy walked over to me and asked if he could
look into the Jeep. I could see the old man grinning at me over the agent's
shoulder. With a mouth full of cotton and pucker-factor creeping over the
nine mark, I managed to croak, "Not unless you tell me what you think you're
looking for." Every cop within hearing distance burst out laughing,
including the DEA agent. He shook his head and walked away.
The old concrete slab is long gone. A housing development went in there.
I moved away. The old man and N2310D disappeared into the mountains
somewhere between Anchorage and North Way. Every time I drive into San
Berdoo I remember that night.

[zatatime]

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:28:43 GMT, "Casey Wilson"
> wrote:

> Every time I drive into San
>Berdoo I remember that night.

Sorry for your loss, but thanks for sharing your good memories.

z

[Peter Duniho]

"Ernest Christley" > wrote in message
. com...
> Don't the federal regulation forbid dropping under 500ft AGL over someone
> else's property?

Not even close.

> I think the law is that anything below 500 is the airspace of the private
> property owner

Property owners have no right of ownership of any sort with respect to the
airspace above their property.

[Jose]

>> Don't the federal regulation forbid dropping under 500ft AGL over someone
>> else's property?
>
> Not even close.

The regs generally forbid flying an airplane less than 500 feet from
any structure or vessel, except for takeoff and landing.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
> The regs generally forbid flying an airplane less than 500 feet from any
> structure or vessel, except for takeoff and landing.

So what? Those regulations don't apply in congested areas (such as those
described by Ernest), and they don't apply during takeoffs and landings in
any case (the specific situation this entire thread is about).

[Judah]

Where is this? My kids would probably get a big kick out of something like
that...

Newps > wrote in news:3N2dnbVgu59cGircRVn-
:

> We have a guy here that has a 1500 pound thing he hangs from his
> Jetranger each Christmas. It is Santa in his sleigh and a couple of
> reindeer. There's about a thousand lights being run from the generator
> bungied to the skids. He flies without any lights on the copter and the
> route is published in the paper on Dec 23 each year. His whole flight
> takes him a couple hours.
>

[TaxSrv]

"Peter Duniho" wrote:
>
> > I think the law is that anything below 500 is the airspace of the
private
> > property owner
>
> Property owners have no right of ownership of any sort with respect
to the
> airspace above their property.
>
Yes they do. A property owner has rights to airspace for any
reasonable use thereof under common law, where FAA's 500' reference
may be irrelevant. One example is erection of an antenna tower on
your property. FAA rules under Part 77 on obstructions apply only to
a potential obstruction to public-use airports and to otherwise
navigational airspace -- at least 500' for the latter, but not to
private strips at all. So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a
hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights of
the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common law.
Of course, to be decided in a court of common pleas, or by Judge Judy,
or at minimum a rather good "arguendo" exercise under individual State
law as to "neighbor law" in a law school class!

Fred F.

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 04:28:43 GMT, "Casey Wilson" >
wrote in <%vQtd.755$Qp.517@trnddc01>::

>Several years ago, when I lived in the north end of San Bernardino,
>California, my father-in-law used to land on a concrete slab left over from
>a WWII Army supply depot. It was about a mile and a half from the house,
>just of the east side of Interstate-15 We had scoped the place out, cleared
>some brush, and sunk some anchors for tie downs. He lived and flew in Alaska
>and the plane was a C-170B with big flaps and huge mains.
> Pop would fly over the house and rack the throttle a couple times to get
>my attention, then head for the patch. By the time I got there he'd be
>tieing the plane down.
> One late evening, right at twilight, we went through the drill. I helped
>him finish up the tie-downs and just as we started to unload... Headlights,
>spotlights, and cops -- sheriff, Highway patrol, city cops, and we found out
>in a few minutes the FBI and DEA -- appeared from every direction!

[snip]

Thanks for the great story.

You're lucky you didn't end up like Frank Critzer at Giant Rock.
Rumor is that the San Bernardino or Riverside police lobbed a tear gas
canister into his home and set off the dynamite he had stored there.
http://www.integratron.com/2History/History.html
http://www.lucernevalley.net/giantrock/
http://www.labyrinthina.com/rock.htm

[Jose]

>>The regs generally forbid flying an airplane less than 500 feet from any
>> structure or vessel, except for takeoff and landing.
>
> So what? Those regulations don't apply in congested areas (such as those
> described by Ernest), and they don't apply during takeoffs and landings in
> any case (the specific situation this entire thread is about).

Over congested areas it's 1000 feet. And I stated "except for takeoff
and landing", which =is= what the thread is about. I was clarifying
what the reg is, not arguing that the reg prohibits takeoff or landing
outside an airport.

Jose
(r.a.homebuilt trimmed)
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Rich S.]

"Casey Wilson" > wrote in message
news:%vQtd.755$Qp.517@trnddc01...
(snip)
> The old man and N2310D disappeared into the mountains somewhere between
> Anchorage and North Way. Every time I drive into San Berdoo I remember
> that night.

Wish I had known him. Thanks for sharing.

Rich S.

[Kyler Laird]

writes:

>However, check your local laws, most states have some rules about using
>public roads as your own personal airstrip.

I've not succeeded at getting this information from my state (Indiana).
AOPA has been less than useless on the topic. They shut down discussion
of the legalities and just berate me for even thinking about landing a
plane anywhere other than at a declared airport.

I need to take it up with the county. I keep forgetting when I'm with
the Sheriff...

--kyler

[Peter Duniho]

"TaxSrv" > wrote in message
...
> Yes they do.

No, they don't.

> [...] So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a
> hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights of
> the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common law.

That in no way alters the right of any aircraft to pass through that
airspace freely. The property owner does not "own" the airspace, and has no
privilege to prohibit other people from using it where it is not already
being occupied by something else, as suggested by the person to whom I was
replying.

Pete

[TaxSrv]

"Peter Duniho" wrote:
> > [...] So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a
> > hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights
of
> > the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common
law.
>
> That in no way alters the right of any aircraft to pass through that
> airspace freely. The property owner does not "own" the airspace,
and has no
> privilege to prohibit other people from using it where it is not
already
> being occupied by something else, as suggested by the person to whom
I was
> replying.
>

It's not really a matter of "ownership," but rather whether use of
airspace down low over other people's property denies them their right
of enjoyment and freedom from hazards. Here's 3 samples of decisions
in various states, concerning private airstrips:

"The court emphasized that in this case the airport was private, not
public, and ruled that "there is nothing to distinguish a private
airport from any other private business with regard to enjoining
operations which create a nuisance."

"The trial court issued an injunction against use of the airstrip, and
the appellate court held the injunction appropriate on the grounds
that use of the airstrip, even without actual invasion of the
utility's land, constituted a nuisance to the utility's transmission
lines." [Note the utility put up the transmission lines; then sued the
adjacent private airport owner!]

"Neighboring property owners sued owners of a private airport for
damages due to aircraft noise. Held: An airport operating in
conformance with state and federal law may nevertheless constitute a
nuisance, and the Federal Aviation Act does not preempt damages for
unreasonable noise from an airport....In addition, plaintiffs may
recover for inconvenience, annoyance, and discomfort caused by
nuisance as long as the interference with use and enjoyment of their
property is unreasonable and substantial."

Fred F.

[Newps]

KBIL Every Christmas Eve.

Judah wrote:
> Where is this? My kids would probably get a big kick out of something like
> that...
>
> Newps > wrote in news:3N2dnbVgu59cGircRVn-
> :
>
>
>>We have a guy here that has a 1500 pound thing he hangs from his
>>Jetranger each Christmas. It is Santa in his sleigh and a couple of
>>reindeer. There's about a thousand lights being run from the generator
>>bungied to the skids. He flies without any lights on the copter and the
>>route is published in the paper on Dec 23 each year. His whole flight
>>takes him a couple hours.
>>

[Newps]

TaxSrv wrote:


>
> "The trial court issued an injunction against use of the airstrip, and
> the appellate court held the injunction appropriate on the grounds
> that use of the airstrip, even without actual invasion of the
> utility's land, constituted a nuisance to the utility's transmission
> lines." [Note the utility put up the transmission lines; then sued the
> adjacent private airport owner!]

This is odd as most utilities will bury the lines for your runway if you
pay the cost of burial. Unless of course you're talking about those
monster transmission lines.

[Judah]

Oh darn. A bit too far to fly in an Arrow...


Newps > wrote in
:

> KBIL Every Christmas Eve.
>
> Judah wrote:
>> Where is this? My kids would probably get a big kick out of something
>> like that...
>>
>> Newps > wrote in news:3N2dnbVgu59cGircRVn-
>> :
>>
>>
>>>We have a guy here that has a 1500 pound thing he hangs from his
>>>Jetranger each Christmas. It is Santa in his sleigh and a couple of
>>>reindeer. There's about a thousand lights being run from the
>>>generator bungied to the skids. He flies without any lights on the
>>>copter and the route is published in the paper on Dec 23 each year.
>>>His whole flight takes him a couple hours.
>>>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"TaxSrv" > wrote in message
...
> It's not really a matter of "ownership,"

That's what I've been saying. Thank you.

[Blueskies]

"Casey Wilson" > wrote in message news:%vQtd.755$Qp.517@trnddc01...
> The old man and N2310D disappeared into the mountains somewhere between Anchorage and North Way. Every time I drive
> into San Berdoo I remember that night.
>


We need more like him today...

[Cub Driver]

On 7 Dec 2004 05:28:01 -0800, wrote:

>However, check your local laws, most states have some rules about using
>public roads as your own personal airstrip.

Some few years ago I was heli-skiing out of Valemount BC. This was
before the operator built a lodge; he was using a commercial motel.
The Huey parked overnight in a circle out front.

I flew up to Valemount in the back of a Piper Cub (J-4 or J-5, can't
rememer which). The local "FBO" came out to fuel it from a 55 gallon
drum in the back of a pickup. However long the airstrip was, it wasn't
long enough for the next plane to bring a client in. That was a
private twin of some sort.

So the Mounties closed off the highway in front of the Valemount
Motel. The plane landed and taxied into the motel parking lot. The
Mounties behaved as if this were all in the day's work.

Presumably the couple took off again the same way. They were from
Texas, and the girlfriend wore dark glasses and a shawl like Jackie
Onassis.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:25:30 GMT, zatatime > wrote:

>In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,
>which puts the kabosh on your plan for this state.

And no water landings, right?

Damian Delgaizo at Andover Flight Academy was planning to put floats
on his Husky (amphibious, presumably). As I understood it, he would
have to do the actual training across the state line in PA!


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:04:44 -0900, "PJ Hunt" >
wrote:

>So you CAN go alone or take your friends, as long as you don't charge them
>or receive a reward, and land in all the fields you want without prior
>permission from the 'commission. Of course you would want to approve it
>with the land owner first.

There are indeed private fields in NJ. Of course they may pre-date the
ordinance quoted.

I landed at several such when I took Damian Delgaizo's bush-flying
course.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[zatatime]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:35:58 -0500, Cub Driver
> wrote:

>On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:25:30 GMT, zatatime > wrote:
>
>>In NJ you can't land anywhere except and approved landing facility,
>>which puts the kabosh on your plan for this state.
>
>And no water landings, right?
>
>Damian Delgaizo at Andover Flight Academy was planning to put floats
>on his Husky (amphibious, presumably). As I understood it, he would
>have to do the actual training across the state line in PA!
>
>
This is correct. Damian was going to do this after someone else with
a Lake Amphib left the area. She had to use lakes in PA only as she
could not land on any open water other than designated seaplane bases
like the one on the Hudson.

HTH.
z

(Does Damian use any places to land other than approved landing
facilities for his other program? He'd know enough farmers out there
that he would if he could, and it might shed some light on the
original statement above.)

[zatatime]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:37:48 -0500, Cub Driver
> wrote:

>There are indeed private fields in NJ. Of course they may pre-date the
>ordinance quoted.

Private airfields / strips, or just regular farm fields?

z

[G.R. Patterson III]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> And no water landings, right?

There used to be a private seaplane base on the Raritan river just below New
Brunswick. The guy who owned the property kept a Cessna with amphibs there. He
operated from the river during the summer.

A few years ago, he was talking about selling the property. Someone at Kupper
(probably John Price) was telling me that the license to operate aircraft there
would expire unless he sold it to another seaplane owner.

Even if that's gone, there are seaplane bases on the Raritan Bay at Atlantic
Highlands, on the Navasink river above Rumson, on the inland waterway near
Lakewood, at Toms River, and at Manahawkin. Though a few of those are miles
inland, all of them are on tidal waters, and may be beyond the control of the
State. There're also bases on Greenwood lake and the Delaware, but both of those
are on State borders - I can't tell for sure if they're in NJ.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[zatatime]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:01:54 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>There're also bases on Greenwood lake and the Delaware, but both of those
>are on State borders - I can't tell for sure if they're in NJ.

The one on the Delaware is in PA, I don't know about Greenwood Lake.
I also didn't know of all the bases in south Jersey either. I don't
remember seeing them on a sectional. Unfortunately PA is closer to
Andover than those places so the flight school Cub Driver is talking
about would still be better off going to PA.

Thanks for the info!
z

[G.R. Patterson III]

zatatime wrote:
>
> I also didn't know of all the bases in south Jersey either. I don't
> remember seeing them on a sectional.

They're all on the NY and DC sectionals and all are shown as private.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Dana M. Hague]

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:19:42 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>Rich asked for a definition of "approved". That's what Gig provided. The section
>he quoted does prohibit commercial operations, but no claim has been made that
>that's the entire law in New Jersey. Perhaps "zatatime" can provide a reference
>to the statute that prohibits other operations?

I can't provide a statute, but around 20 years ago while flying the
"slot" I emergency landed my T-Craft on a Hudson River pier (in
Weehawken, on the Jersey side). The emergency landing was OK as far
as both the FAA and state were concerned, but I got in all sorts of
trouble when I flew it out again the next day after the problem was
solved. In the end the feds admittited I hadn't violated any FAR's
and the state aviation people (who actually were very reasonable about
it) decided not to charge me as long as I promised to never land there
again.

-Dana


--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
I'm wasting much too much time on the internet,
and probably, so are you.

[Cub Driver]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:54:08 GMT, zatatime > wrote:

>>There are indeed private fields in NJ. Of course they may pre-date the
>>ordinance quoted.
>
>Private airfields / strips, or just regular farm fields?

Is there a difference?

All I know is that I landed on runways that weren't public-use
airfields. They weren't pastures, if that's what you mean. One of them
had a hangar and a windsock and a mowed strip; I believe that that was
a public-use airfield in the process of going private. The others were
more basic, but all were mowed and clearly visible as runways from the
air, and were used regularly by their owners and their friends.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:29:44 -0500, Dana M. Hague
<d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote:

>I can't provide a statute, but around 20 years ago while flying the
>"slot" I emergency landed my T-Craft on a Hudson River pier (in
>Weehawken, on the Jersey side). The emergency landing was OK as far
>as both the FAA and state were concerned, but I got in all sorts of
>trouble when I flew it out again the next day

There's a closed army air field not far from Boston. Friend of a
friend landed there when he had engine trouble. He was required to
dissasemble the aircraft and truck it out of there; wasn't permitted
to take off.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:51:17 GMT, zatatime > wrote:

>(Does Damian use any places to land other than approved landing
>facilities for his other program? He'd know enough farmers out there
>that he would if he could, and it might shed some light on the
>original statement above.)

As posted, we landed on private land. It's possible that these private
runways were approved by some authority or other.

One such could have been a farmer's field. The others were regularly
used by their owners as runways, including a strip on a fairly steep
hill.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[[email protected]]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> As posted, we landed on private land. It's possible that these
private
> runways were approved by some authority or other.
>
> One such could have been a farmer's field. The others were regularly
> used by their owners as runways, including a strip on a fairly steep
> hill.
>

They might have fallen under the exception(s) alluded to in the
statute:

"except as provided for by the provisions of this
chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted
pursuant to this chapter, "
Does anyone know where to look for those?

--

FF

[Rich S.]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> They might have fallen under the exception(s) alluded to in the
> statute:
>
> "except as provided for by the provisions of this
> chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted
> pursuant to this chapter, "
> Does anyone know where to look for those?

Sorry. This was undoubtedly written by lawyers - one of whom you must now
pay to interpret.

Rich S.

[jls]

"Rich S." > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> > They might have fallen under the exception(s) alluded to in the
> > statute:
> >
> > "except as provided for by the provisions of this
> > chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted
> > pursuant to this chapter, "
> > Does anyone know where to look for those?
>
> Sorry. This was undoubtedly written by lawyers - one of whom you must now
> pay to interpret.
>
> Rich S.
>
Well, Richie-Pooh, is suffering from the dark negativism of hysterical
melancholia today, so I'll tell you how to find them. You get the book of
statutes and look at the whole chapter, which will be indexed. A statute
will often refer to another statute and so on, so you read all of them until
you get a general understanding of the legislative policy of that state on
the specific topic you're interested in. Many non-lawyers read and
understand statutes as well as or better than lawyers do. There will also
be references to judicial opinions, attorney general opinions, and
administrative rules on the pages following the statutes you are looking at.
This is true with regard to the statutes in any state I'm familiar with.
If you can't find those statutes on the net, go to a law library. At the
University of Tennessee College of Law library in Knoxville the last I
looked there were codes of laws of just about every state in the USA, in
bound volumes.

[jls]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Cub Driver wrote:
> >
> > As posted, we landed on private land. It's possible that these
> private
> > runways were approved by some authority or other.
> >
> > One such could have been a farmer's field. The others were regularly
> > used by their owners as runways, including a strip on a fairly steep
> > hill.
> >
>
> They might have fallen under the exception(s) alluded to in the
> statute:
>
> "except as provided for by the provisions of this
> chapter and the rules, regulations and orders adopted
> pursuant to this chapter, "
> Does anyone know where to look for those?
>
> --
>
> FF
>

Which state? For the state you're interested in, start with a net search
using Google. Plug in "north carolina statutes" for example, or "new
jersey statutes."

[zatatime]

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:40:30 -0500, Cub Driver
> wrote:

>All I know is that I landed on runways that weren't public-use
>airfields. They weren't pastures, if that's what you mean.
That's what I mean.

>One of them
>had a hangar and a windsock and a mowed strip; I believe that that was
>a public-use airfield in the process of going private.

If it was near Andover it will stay public. Loong sorrowful story on
that one, I worked there for about 10 years. Good news is the town
bought it. Bad news is the town doesn't know what to do with it.
Buildings need some repair, but a flight operation and maintenance
shop (which used to thrive there) would be enough to get it going
again. We're working on getting through.

>The others were
>more basic, but all were mowed and clearly visible as runways from the
>air, and were used regularly by their owners and their friends.

Thanks. You've outlined Private/Public strips. I was wondering about
the pasture aspect of it.

z

[Dana M. Hague]

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:42:39 -0500, Cub Driver
> wrote:

>...Friend of a
>friend landed there when he had engine trouble. He was required to
>dissasemble the aircraft and truck it out of there; wasn't permitted
>to take off.

Yeah, they told me the same... but when I went down later in the
evening to "check on the plane" there was nobody around, and I figured
(correctly, but barely) that it would be easier to beg forgiveness
than get permission...

On a related note while we're discussing NJ statutes, does anybody
know what the legality is of ultralight operations off other than
approved airfields?

-Dana
--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Come to think of it, there already are a million monkeys at a million typewriters, and the Internet is _NOTHING_ like Shakespeare!