Vindicated: The Rule with the Murphy's Law Chancre on It

[jls]

http://down.westmont.edu/pipermail/aeronca/2002-June/011404.html

A northwesterner is criminally cited for handpropping his aircraft without a
competent person at the controls. Apparently old news but still salient.

[Scott]

King County can 2 lips, fully puckered, kiss my a$$

Next I suppose they'll go after the John Deere and Model T owners that
have to hand crank their machines to get them going!

Big brother thinks they have to hold everybody's hand so they don't hurt
themselves. At least today, you don't have to worry about hurting
anybody else at an airport since there is never anyone around anyway.
Pretty hard to put a competent pilot in your airplane to start up if
nobody is around...

God I love these self-righteous government officials that have to do all
they can to justify their jobs.

Scott
Still hand-proppin' in WI


jls wrote:
> http://down.westmont.edu/pipermail/aeronca/2002-June/011404.html
>
> A northwesterner is criminally cited for handpropping his aircraft without a
> competent person at the controls. Apparently old news but still salient.
>
>

[Dean A. Scott]

> Title 15, Section 15.16.110 of the King County
> code states, "Except aircraft in control of authorized maintenance
> shops, no aircraft engine should be started or run unless a pilot or
> mechanic is attending the controls." One pilot found out the
> consequences of this somewhat unique ordinance when, after starting
> his aircraft, he was issued a criminal citation by a deputy sheriff.

Sounds rather straight forward that this is talking about leaving an
engine and prop running unattended (walking far away from it), not
about how one starts it and throttle proximity.

What was this sheriff doing there anyway? Sounds like he had a gripe
with aircraft, or maybe noise complaints from nearby residents, so he
looked for a code for the express purpose of finding someone to give
a ticket to. Was he like, right there standing next to the guy, daring
him not to start it up or else?

Yep, hand-propping outside the cockpit is definitely a "not-in-control"
and extremely dangerous situation. Says who? Right, it's left up to
the interpretation of uneducated law enforcement. Wise... very wise.

Hope the guy was exonerated for his "intolerable, stupid, and publicly
endangering act."





Dean A. Scott, mfa
---------------------------------------
School of Visual Art and Design
southern adventist university
---------------------------------------
http://www.southern.edu/~dascott

[Bill Chernoff]

next they'll be citing those folks with a cold-weather remote control
starter in their car...

[Steve Foley]

Hey, If you need to bail out of your plane cuz it's on fire, and you happen
to be wearing a chute, make sure you stop the prop first, OK?

"Bill Chernoff" > wrote in message
news:Rg1Re.334716$5V4.320622@pd7tw3no...
> next they'll be citing those folks with a cold-weather remote control
> starter in their car...
>
>

[jls]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:AL1Re.13526$cY.6810@trndny06...
> Hey, If you need to bail out of your plane cuz it's on fire, and you
happen
> to be wearing a chute, make sure you stop the prop first, OK?
>
> "Bill Chernoff" > wrote in message
> news:Rg1Re.334716$5V4.320622@pd7tw3no...
> > next they'll be citing those folks with a cold-weather remote control
> > starter in their car...
> >

Apples and cumquats. They've tried to get through to you libertarians that
you have to have a competent person at the controls or at least have the
beast tied down. What's so difficult about that, or firing it up from
behind the prop with the door swung 180 degrees, so you're at the throttle
and ignition? Dingnab loonytarians think they have a right to unleash a
mad bull on the neighborhood, and I got a lot of loonytarian blood myself.

There's a true story about several one-armed flight instructors in a small
area of Pennsylvania, and another true story about the lady Cub-owner who
always expected her instructor to prop the Cub for her, but failed her
checkride because she expected the FAA examiner to prop it for her too ---
because she had never tried it.

Then there was the Taylorcraft owner, another lady kind and naive, who let a
student climb into her plane as she was pulling the prop through. She had
the engine set at idle but it inexplicably roared to life. She tried to
arrest it by grabbing the strut, which merely helped it arc into several
other unlucky aircraft. This one rings true with me because I don't know
how many times I have gotten into a Taylorcraft and all of a sudden gotten
an immediate shot of adrenaline when it made a quick roaring bee-line for a
hangar or a Baron on the ramp. You're all excited about getting seated,
settling in and flying, got your mind on those belts, intercom, and
headsets --- it never occurs to you that you just inadvertently firewalled
the throttle with your knee.

In northern Australia a pilot decided to take some children for a ride in
the Salvation Army's 182. The battery was down so he got out and
hand-propped it. It got away and was getting airborne but was stopped by
trees and destroyed. Thankfully the children were not badly injured.

[Steve Foley]

From the site you quoted:

Title 15, Section 15.16.110 of the King County
code states, "Except aircraft in control of authorized maintenance
shops, no aircraft engine should be started or run unless a pilot or
mechanic is attending the controls."

It doesn't say anything about 'the beast being tied down'.

" jls" > wrote in message
...

> Apples and cumquats. They've tried to get through to you libertarians
that
> you have to have a competent person at the controls or at least have the
> beast tied down.

[Rich S.]

"Bill Chernoff" > wrote in message
news:Rg1Re.334716$5V4.320622@pd7tw3no...
> next they'll be citing those folks with a cold-weather remote control
> starter in their car...

They do.

Rich "It's for your own good, to prevent theft of your auto" S.
Pierce County, WA

[Steve Foley]

But it's still illegal.

"karel" > wrote in message
...

Someone disregarding that rule, for whatever reason, could and should at
least show common sense.

[Morgans]

"Bill Chernoff" > wrote in message
news:Rg1Re.334716$5V4.320622@pd7tw3no...
> next they'll be citing those folks with a cold-weather remote control
> starter in their car..

There are places where leaving your car running (especially in the winter in
the morning) is illegal. That's a fact.
--
Jim in NC

[jls]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:iE2Re.7744$wE1.2342@trndny01...
> From the site you quoted:
>
> Title 15, Section 15.16.110 of the King County
> code states, "Except aircraft in control of authorized maintenance
> shops, no aircraft engine should be started or run unless a pilot or
> mechanic is attending the controls."
>
> It doesn't say anything about 'the beast being tied down'.
>
> " jls" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Apples and cumquats. They've tried to get through to you libertarians
> that
> > you have to have a competent person at the controls or at least have the
> > beast tied down.

If I were cited under the King County ordinance for violation and I had the
aircraft tied down, I would argue, probably in futility, that the spirit if
not the letter of the law had been complied with, since the obvious public
policy of the ordinance was to deter aircraft from running off berserk
without a pilot and tearing up things and killing people.

To my knowledge the FAA never violates anyone on the rule requiring a
competent person at the controls when an aircraft engine is started, unless
the aircraft gets away and does some of those weird things they are wont to
do --- as in slice up other airplanes or hangars.

[[email protected]]

<Someone disregarding that rule, for whatever reason, could and should
at
least show common sense.>
-------------------------------------------------------

Common sense is remarkably uncommon stuff in the world of aviation.

-R.S.Hoover

[Richard Isakson]

"Steve Foley" wrote ...
> Title 15, Section 15.16.110 of the King County
> code states, "Except aircraft in control of authorized maintenance
> shops, no aircraft engine should be started or run unless a pilot or
> mechanic is attending the controls."

OK. You got a pilot or mechanic sitting in your airplane and your airplane
only has one set of brake peddles. You swing the prop on your own airplane
and it starts up. Now, how do you get the ******* out of your airplane
without breaking the law?

Rich

[Ron Wanttaja]

>> A northwesterner is criminally cited for handpropping his aircraft without
>> a competent person at the controls. Apparently old news but still salient.

The question is...what happened afterwards? Did the guy cop a plea, did he get
fined, did they drop the charges?

Ron Wanttaja

[John]

wrote:

> <Someone disregarding that rule, for whatever reason, could and should
> at
> least show common sense.>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Common sense is remarkably uncommon stuff in the world of aviation.
>
> -R.S.Hoover

Why limit the remark to Aviation?
John

[Mike Gaskins]

Actually, it also doesn't mention "someone competent". It states "a
pilot or mechanic". That's a much narrower group of people.

[CB]

He should plead innocent, and testify that he was in fact "attending"
the controls. He had them set just so - throttle cracked, fuel off (so
when it starts it runs for just long enough to get in and get your
hands on the throttle) brakes set, tied down with a quick-release. The
letter of the law doesn't require someone in the cockpit.