A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Anybody heard of this rule for airports.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 8th 07, 09:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Gig 601XL Builder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,317
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.

Our city council was told last night by the mayor that a fire truck was
going to have to be placed and manned at KELD because of "a federal mandate
requiring fire-fighting personnel and equipment be posted at the airport 15
minutes before and 15 minutes after the take-off and landing of each flight
at the airport." If the reg is for real I'm sure that "part 121" should be
in that sentence some where and we do have scheduled air service with Mesa.

I just find it strange that this regulation just got promulgated. So either
it did or we have been in violation for quite some time or the mayor is full
of crap.

But, according to the article the FAA going to give the city a fire fighting
truck to be delivered next month.


  #2  
Old June 9th 07, 01:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Peter Clark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.

On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 15:02:26 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:

Our city council was told last night by the mayor that a fire truck was
going to have to be placed and manned at KELD because of "a federal mandate
requiring fire-fighting personnel and equipment be posted at the airport 15
minutes before and 15 minutes after the take-off and landing of each flight
at the airport." If the reg is for real I'm sure that "part 121" should be
in that sentence some where and we do have scheduled air service with Mesa.

I just find it strange that this regulation just got promulgated. So either
it did or we have been in violation for quite some time or the mayor is full
of crap.

But, according to the article the FAA going to give the city a fire fighting
truck to be delivered next month.


If you have scheduled service the airport is probably part 139
certified. See 139.319:

Sec. 139.319

Aircraft rescue and firefighting: Operational requirements.

(a) Rescue and firefighting capability. Except as provided in
paragraph (c) of this section, each certificate holder [must] provide
on the airport, during air carrier operations at the airport, at least
the rescue and firefighting capability specified for the Index
required by Sec. 139.317 in a manner authorized by the Administrator.

(rest of reg snipped). If you have service, are 139 certified, and
didn't have a truck it seems that the airport was just in violation of
the reg. I'm surprised it got air carrier certified if it didn't have
a truck at the time service was started.

Course, I could be misreading the reg.
  #3  
Old June 9th 07, 02:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.


"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

Our city council was told last night by the mayor that a fire truck was
going to have to be placed and manned at KELD because of "a federal
mandate requiring fire-fighting personnel and equipment be posted at the
airport 15 minutes before and 15 minutes after the take-off and landing of
each flight at the airport." If the reg is for real I'm sure that "part
121" should be in that sentence some where and we do have scheduled air
service with Mesa.

I just find it strange that this regulation just got promulgated. So
either it did or we have been in violation for quite some time or the
mayor is full of crap.

But, according to the article the FAA going to give the city a fire
fighting truck to be delivered next month.


That's a Part 139 requirement, it applies only to airports with passenger
service. It's not a new regulation.


  #4  
Old June 11th 07, 03:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Gig 601XL Builder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,317
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

Our city council was told last night by the mayor that a fire truck
was going to have to be placed and manned at KELD because of "a
federal mandate requiring fire-fighting personnel and equipment be
posted at the airport 15 minutes before and 15 minutes after the
take-off and landing of each flight at the airport." If the reg is
for real I'm sure that "part 121" should be in that sentence some
where and we do have scheduled air service with Mesa.

I just find it strange that this regulation just got promulgated. So
either it did or we have been in violation for quite some time or the
mayor is full of crap.

But, according to the article the FAA going to give the city a fire
fighting truck to be delivered next month.


That's a Part 139 requirement, it applies only to airports with
passenger service. It's not a new regulation.


I did a little digging this weekend and yes we have been in violation for
quite some time. Good news is we aren't anymore. A truck was delivered to
the airport Saturday as I was leaving.

The nearest fire station is about 10 minutes away. So for every flight we
are looking at having two firefighters have to be out assigned for at least
an hour and a half.

[makes note to schedule first flight of 601XL for when they will be there]


  #5  
Old June 12th 07, 12:08 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.


"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

I did a little digging this weekend and yes we have been in violation for
quite some time. Good news is we aren't anymore. A truck was delivered to
the airport Saturday as I was leaving.

The nearest fire station is about 10 minutes away. So for every flight we
are looking at having two firefighters have to be out assigned for at
least an hour and a half.

[makes note to schedule first flight of 601XL for when they will be there]


What carrier serves KELD?


  #6  
Old June 12th 07, 02:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Gig 601XL Builder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,317
Default Anybody heard of this rule for airports.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

I did a little digging this weekend and yes we have been in
violation for quite some time. Good news is we aren't anymore. A
truck was delivered to the airport Saturday as I was leaving.

The nearest fire station is about 10 minutes away. So for every
flight we are looking at having two firefighters have to be out
assigned for at least an hour and a half.

[makes note to schedule first flight of 601XL for when they will be
there]


What carrier serves KELD?


Mesa, thanks to the Essential Air Service Program.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Heard on the air Roy Smith General Aviation 0 January 19th 07 02:03 AM
Heard on the air Roy Smith Instrument Flight Rules 3 May 15th 05 03:33 AM
Heard on the air Jon Woellhaf Piloting 1 January 29th 05 01:45 AM
Anyone Heard anything about this ... john smith Piloting 0 January 1st 05 05:20 PM
Don't think I've ever heard that one before Paul Tomblin Piloting 7 November 11th 03 08:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.