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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
This came up in another group and no one had an answer. What is the relationship of the FAA to the military? Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? -- Dallas |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
Dallas wrote:
This came up in another group and no one had an answer. What is the relationship of the FAA to the military? Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? FAA is the final authority. Military must go through the petition/waiver/notice of proposed rulemaking process to obtain permission for non-emergency issues. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
In article ,
john smith wrote: This came up in another group and no one had an answer. What is the relationship of the FAA to the military? Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? FAA is the final authority. Military must go through the petition/waiver/notice of proposed rulemaking process to obtain permission for non-emergency issues. ??? The FAA doesn't have any say wrt airworthiness certifiation of US military aircraft (any FAA certification of military aircraft is at the option of the service). And then there is the option of "due regard" -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 14:41:06 -0800, Dallas wrote
(in article ): This came up in another group and no one had an answer. What is the relationship of the FAA to the military? Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? Lately it is more a matter of whether the FAA is subject to military authority, isn't it? Of late, whenever the military says, "JUMP!" the FAA seems to be saying, "How high?" The FAA does not certify military crew members or aircraft, nor does it certify the crew members or aircraft of any federal, state, or local governmental agency. All such crew members may fly without a license or medical certificate as far as the FAA is concerned. That "eye in the sky" highway patrolman checking your speed does not need a pilot certificate, and he could be legally flying just about anything. Since the FAA does not certify crew members or airplanes, they cannot very well threaten to take those certificates away, can they? And that is really just about the only enforcement action the FAA is allowed to take, ultimately. Most non-military governmental agencies insist that their crew members and aircraft be certified by the FAA for insurance reasons if for no other purpose. Apply to your state government for a flying job and they will likely require a commercial certificate and stiff minimum experience requirements. They will also insist that all FARs be followed to the letter. But that is the state requiring these things, not the FAA. The military is different. Military regulations will generally match or even exceed the FARs and ICAO rules, but the military reserves the right to make exceptions. There are cases of military pilots or even military commanders being cited for violations of the FARs by the FAA, but these were rare and extremely egregious cases resulting in death or threat of death to civilians in the air or on the ground. I was involved in one such case where the FAA issued a violation to a wing commander on the ground for "reckless operation of an aircraft," because the commander had knowingly ordered aircraft into an area of extreme turbulence for an exercise. Several crew members were injured and some were in the hospital for more than six months. The military relieved the colonel from duty and the FAA dropped the violation. That was one very long night, I can tell you. I see nothing in the FARs which give the FAA authority over military operations. If push came to shove, the military would probably just tell the FAA to buzz off and the FAA really wouldn't be able to do anything about it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
C J Campbell wrote:
I see nothing in the FARs which give the FAA authority over military operations. You're looking in the wrong place! I believe the Federal Aviation Act of 1958[1] was the first legislation that gave the FAA sole responsibility for a common civil-military system of air navigation and air traffic control. Section (d)(4) of reference [2] appears to be the relevant passage of the current law that grants the FAA the power to regulate both military and civilian traffic in the U.S. national airspace: "(d) Safety Considerations in Public Interest. - In carrying out subpart III of this part and those provisions of subpart IV applicable in carrying out subpart III, the Administrator shall consider the following matters, among others, as being in the public interest: (1) assigning, maintaining, and enhancing safety and security as the highest priorities in air commerce. (2) regulating air commerce in a way that best promotes safety and fulfills national defense requirements. (3) encouraging and developing civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology. (4) controlling the use of the navigable airspace and regulating civil and military operations in that airspace in the interest of the safety and efficiency of both of those operations." And the only exceptions to the FAA's regulatory power over the national airspace seem to appear in reference [3]: "Section 40106. Emergency powers (a) Deviations From Regulations. - Appropriate military authority may authorize aircraft of the armed forces of the United States to deviate from air traffic regulations prescribed under section 40103(b)(1) and (2) of this title when the authority decides the deviation is essential to the national defense because of a military emergency or urgent military necessity. The authority shall - (1) give the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration prior notice of the deviation at the earliest practicable time; and (2) to the extent time and circumstances allow, make every reasonable effort to consult with the Administrator and arrange for the deviation in advance on a mutually agreeable basis. (b) Suspension of Authority. - (1) When the President decides that the government of a foreign country is acting inconsistently with the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft or that the government of a foreign country allows territory under its jurisdiction to be used as a base of operations or training of, or as a sanctuary for, or arms, aids, or abets, a terrorist organization that knowingly uses the unlawful seizure, or the threat of an unlawful seizure, of an aircraft as an instrument of policy, the President may suspend the authority of - (A) an air carrier or foreign air carrier to provide foreign air transportation to and from that foreign country; (B) a person to operate aircraft in foreign air commerce to and from that foreign country; (C) a foreign air carrier to provide foreign air transportation between the United States and another country that maintains air service with the foreign country; and (D) a foreign person to operate aircraft in foreign air commerce between the United States and another country that maintains air service with the foreign country. (2) The President may act under this subsection without notice or a hearing. The suspension remains in effect for as long as the President decides is necessary to ensure the security of aircraft against unlawful seizure. Notwithstanding section 40105(b) of this title, the authority of the President to suspend rights under this subsection is a condition to a certificate of public convenience and necessity, air carrier operating certificate, foreign air carrier or foreign aircraft permit, or foreign air carrier operating specification issued by the Secretary of Transportation under this part. (3) An air carrier or foreign air carrier may not provide foreign air transportation, and a person may not operate aircraft in foreign air commerce, in violation of a suspension of authority under this subsection." See also "Section 40107. Presidential transfers" and "Section 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace". References: [1] Wikipedia, under "Federal Aviation Administration": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal...Administration [2] "United States Code * TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION * SUBTITLE VII - AVIATION PROGRAMS * PART A - AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY * SUBPART I - GENERAL * Chapter 401. General Provisions * Section 40101. Policy" http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/caseco...ion_40101.html [3] "United States Code * TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION * SUBTITLE VII - AVIATION PROGRAMS * PART A - AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY * SUBPART I - GENERAL * Chapter 401. General Provisions * Section 40106. Emergency Powers" http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/caseco...ion_40106.html |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
Dallas wrote:
Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? Please see my reply to C J Campbell's message where I cite what I believe is the appropriate legislation. The answer is not simple, but congress appears to have basically made the FAA the principal regulatory agency over the U.S. airspace and excepting "emergency or urgent military necessity," military flights must follow FAA regulations. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
When flying CAP aircraft I have to follow the super set of the FAA and
the CAP rules. All our aircraft are owned by the USAF. The currency, checkout, ops, etc rules are much stricter than the FAA's. We do have an FAA waver allowing private pilots to fly the aircraft w/o charging them rental. -Robert Dallas wrote: This came up in another group and no one had an answer. What is the relationship of the FAA to the military? Is the FAA the final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the military using an additional set of their own regulations? -- Dallas |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
C J Campbell wrote: I see nothing in the FARs which give the FAA authority over military operations. If push came to shove, the military would probably just tell the FAA to buzz off and the FAA really wouldn't be able to do anything about it. It would be settled in DC as these are policy differences. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message .. . : Dallas wrote: : Is the FAA the : final word on regulations for everything in the US airspace with the : military using an additional set of their own regulations? : : Please see my reply to C J Campbell's message where I cite what I believe : is the appropriate legislation. The answer is not simple, but congress : appears to have basically made the FAA the principal regulatory agency over : the U.S. airspace and excepting "emergency or urgent military necessity," : military flights must follow FAA regulations. so that begs the question, who decides "emergency or urgent military necessity?" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The FAA and the military
Blueskies wrote: so that begs the question, who decides "emergency or urgent military necessity?" The civilians. Always. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|