Would a NASA form help?

"...IMO, being so lost that someone ends up 3 miles from the White
House shows a lack of qualification or competency..."

Using this analogy, a pilot would be exhibiting a "lack of competency"
and would not be covered by ASRS immunity if they busted a Class Bravo
airspace. But, isn't immunity granted for that type of offense?

Yes, the DC ADIZ is the most sensitive of all airspaces. But, with
lack of criminal charges, this incident boils down to a highly
publicized airspace incursion.

Jesse

"Charles O'Rourke" wrote in message
oups.com...
Right, but if the FAA can impose some remedial navigational training
(or other such re-examination), doesn't that specifically fall under
the ASRS immunity exceptions? So in other words, the re-examination
under Section 44709 isn't the punishment, but the fact that it happens
removes your ASRS immunity and leaves you open to the possibility of
certificate action.

That interpretation is certainly arguable. The main counter-argument, I
think, is that on that interpretation, almost any violation disclosed in an
ASRS form could be construed as an "exception" to the immunity promise,
which would make the promise essentially a hoax. So it's hard to see how
that exception could be applied except when a pilot is reasonably deemed to
be irremediably unsafe.

I guess the easiest way to figure this out would be to find some
FAA/court decision where a pilot filed an ASRS form but still was
punished because his action fell under one of the exceptions. I'll
look around.

Thanks, that'd be helpful.

--Gary

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:Ew4he.422$mv5.82@trndny07...
Gary Drescher wrote:

If the government explicitly says "I promise you immunity from sanctions
if
you meet conditions A, B, C", and you go ahead and meet conditions A, B,
C,
then the government can't turn around and say "But wait! We've also
decided
that there's an exception unless you also meet condition D, so we're
going
ahead and imposing sanctions".

Of course it can.

That would just be a blatant violation of the
stated promise; if they could get away with that, then immunity promises
would be meaningless.

So?

And as I pointed out, our legal system depends heavily
on the integrity of immunity promises.

This is not our legal system. This is the TSA giving orders to the FAA.

Both of which march to their own drummers and follow no rules but their own
which are made up on the spot if need be.


George Patterson
"Naked" means you ain't got no clothes on; "nekkid" means you ain't
got
no clothes on - and are up to somethin'.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:um5he.122$n95.38@trndny08...
Gary Drescher wrote:

Overrule the judge? Are you claiming that the NTSB is exempt from
oversight by the judiciary?

Absolutely.

So even though the President has to obey the judiciary, the NTSB doesn't? Is
there a documented example of such defiance by the NTSB?

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:ea5he.93$n95.6@trndny08...
Gary Drescher wrote:

Until there's a coup d'etat, the FAA's actions are subject to judicial
review.

And if the FAA doesn't like the results of that review, they take it to
the NTSB, who will almost always overrule the judge.

Overrule the judge? Are you claiming that the NTSB is exempt from
oversight
by the judiciary?

Certainly, where you been?


--Gary

Jesse Wright wrote:
"...IMO, being so lost that someone ends up 3 miles from the White
House shows a lack of qualification or competency..."

Using this analogy, a pilot would be exhibiting a "lack of competency"
and would not be covered by ASRS immunity if they busted a Class Bravo
airspace. But, isn't immunity granted for that type of offense?

Yes, the DC ADIZ is the most sensitive of all airspaces. But, with
lack of criminal charges, this incident boils down to a highly
publicized airspace incursion.

True, I don't know just how incompetant the pilot has to be before they
lose their ASRS immunity. Is there a distinction between getting a
little too close to the Class Bravo, and blasting right through the
center of it without talking to anyone? It's easier to understand the
former as an honest mistake, the latter shows a real lack of proficiency
with navigation and would create some serious doubt as to whether the
offender is a safe pilot. The latter is more like the current case,
where they ended up right over the center of the FRZ.

Personally, I'm not sure I understand why the ASRS immunity is granted
in the case of airspace busts. Isn't the idea to have pilots come clean
so the system can be repaired if something is broken? If a pilot just
messes up and enters the Class Bravo without talking to ATC, the system
didn't fail, the pilot did. But I guess that's a different discussion.

Charles.
-N8385U

"...Is there a distinction between getting a little too close to the
Class Bravo, and blasting right through the center of it without
talking to anyone.."

Sure there is a distinction. The two scenarios have two very different
consequences. If you graze the edge of Class B, you may not cause any
disturbance. If you fly directly over the departure end of the
runways, then you would probably close the airport down. But, if you
are truly lost and bust the airspace unintentionally, ASRS doesn't
define a threshold of error within its rules.

Jesse

"..Isn't the idea to have pilots come clean so the system can be
repaired if something is broken... "

Agreed.

"Jesse Wright" wrote in message
oups.com...
Yes, the DC ADIZ is the most sensitive of all airspaces. But, with
lack of criminal charges, this incident boils down to a highly
publicized airspace incursion.

I emailed the NASA ASRS folks today to ask them if there was any DC ADIZ
exception to the ASRS immunity policy. I received the following reply:

"This had come to our attention numerous times when the TFR/ADIZ first
became a focus after 9/11. We received a clarification that the ASRS
limited immunity provisions would apply without difference. However, there
are still some FAA people who think that there is some higher power over
these type of violations, but we had the FAA Legal Office weigh in and this
was not true."

--Gary

Jesse Wright wrote:
"...Is there a distinction between getting a little too close to the
Class Bravo, and blasting right through the center of it without
talking to anyone.."

Sure there is a distinction. The two scenarios have two very different
consequences. If you graze the edge of Class B, you may not cause any
disturbance. If you fly directly over the departure end of the
runways, then you would probably close the airport down. But, if you
are truly lost and bust the airspace unintentionally, ASRS doesn't
define a threshold of error within its rules.

Well, I realize there is a distinction safety-wise. But ASRS does
define a threshold of error, doesn't it? The "lack of qualifications or
incompetance" test. It seems you'd be a lot more likely to meet that
test if you cross right over the departure end of the runways without a
clue than if you accidentally bust the edge of the Class Bravo.

Charles.
-N8385U