WAKE UP AMA. Another field closed!!
11-17-2015, 04:42 PM
#276
Yes , Crispy , they do control all aviation , But ! They ain't the ONLY ones that have control over every thing that flys ! Yes , they control everything that flys , and now so too does homeland security .
Or are you disputing the fact that the homeland security folks have the right to issue TFRs ?
11-17-2015, 06:04 PM
#277
And I could pull a similar quote from the department of homeland security where they have the authority to issue TFRs for presidential visits . You point is flat out wrong that ONLY the FAA can impose flight restrictions . No matter how many FAA papers you quote , you either fail to understand or are arguing for the pure fun of it , which is it ?
Answer this one question without any spin or other nonsense ;
"Can the department of homeland security issue a temporary flight restriction ?"
It's either a yes or no answer . No BS links . No doubletalk . Can they or can't they ?
(I know for 100% FACT that the DHS most certainly DOES issue TFRs , , , and with that I'm finished discussing this with someone SO bent on recreational arguing)
11-17-2015, 06:09 PM
#278
And I could pull a similar quote from the department of homeland security where they have the authority to issue TFRs for presidential visits .
Got a link?
You point is flat out wrong that ONLY the FAA can impose flight restrictions . No matter how many FAA papers you quote , you either fail to understand or are arguing for the pure fun of it , which is it ?
Answer this one question without any spin or other nonsense ;
"Can the department of homeland security issue a temporary flight restriction ?"
It's either a yes or no answer . No BS links . No doubletalk . Can they or can't they ?
(I know for 100% FACT that the DHS most certainly DOES issue TFRs , , , and with that I'm finished discussing this with someone SO bent on recreational arguing)
Got a link?
You point is flat out wrong that ONLY the FAA can impose flight restrictions . No matter how many FAA papers you quote , you either fail to understand or are arguing for the pure fun of it , which is it ?
Answer this one question without any spin or other nonsense ;
"Can the department of homeland security issue a temporary flight restriction ?"
It's either a yes or no answer . No BS links . No doubletalk . Can they or can't they ?
(I know for 100% FACT that the DHS most certainly DOES issue TFRs , , , and with that I'm finished discussing this with someone SO bent on recreational arguing)
11-17-2015, 07:48 PM
#279
"The Federal Aviation Regulations, or FARs, are rules prescribed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) governing all aviation activities in the United States."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...on_Regulations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...on_Regulations
11-17-2015, 08:00 PM
#280
"A TFR may be requested by various entities, including: military commands; federal security/intelligence agencies; regional directors of the Offices of Emergency Planning, Civil Defense State Directors; civil authorites directing or coordinating organized releif air operations (e.g., Office of Emergency Planning; law enforcement agencies; U.S. Forest Service; state aeronautical agencies); State Governors; FAA Flight Standards District Office, aviation event organizers, or sporting event officials."
11-17-2015, 08:07 PM
#281
And I could pull a similar quote from the department of homeland security where they have the authority to issue TFRs for presidential visits . You point is flat out wrong that ONLY the FAA can impose flight restrictions . No matter how many FAA papers you quote , you either fail to understand or are arguing for the pure fun of it , which is it ?
Answer this one question without any spin or other nonsense ;
"Can the department of homeland security issue a temporary flight restriction ?"
It's either a yes or no answer . No BS links . No doubletalk . Can they or can't they ?
(I know for 100% FACT that the DHS most certainly DOES issue TFRs , , , and with that I'm finished discussing this with someone SO bent on recreational arguing)
Answer this one question without any spin or other nonsense ;
"Can the department of homeland security issue a temporary flight restriction ?"
It's either a yes or no answer . No BS links . No doubletalk . Can they or can't they ?
(I know for 100% FACT that the DHS most certainly DOES issue TFRs , , , and with that I'm finished discussing this with someone SO bent on recreational arguing)
Crispy is trolling. DHS, military, law enforcement, etc. ask FAA to issue a NOTAM and they do. Crispy is dwelling on the very narrow point that the FAA actually issues the NOTAM. But that's really just the administrative implementation of the request made by the other organizations.
11-17-2015, 08:27 PM
#284
"A TFR may be requested by various entities, including: military commands; federal security/intelligence agencies; regional directors of the Offices of Emergency Planning, Civil Defense State Directors; civil authorites directing or coordinating organized releif air operations (e.g., Office of Emergency Planning; law enforcement agencies; U.S. Forest Service; state aeronautical agencies); State Governors; FAA Flight Standards District Office, aviation event organizers, or sporting event officials."
11-18-2015, 04:12 AM
#286
Crispy is trolling. DHS, military, law enforcement, etc. ask FAA to issue a NOTAM and they do. Crispy is dwelling on the very narrow point that the FAA actually issues the NOTAM. But that's really just the administrative implementation of the request made by the other organizations.
I figured as such with the trolling , since the FAA has no authority to refuse an order from DHS for a TFR . When the DHS orders a TFR , just because it's the FAA that announces the TFR to the flying publc , I'd still say it's the DHS that has closed the area since the FAA has no choice but to comply with the DHS' order . 
And yes Mike , the area is still closed which sucks in my opinion to loose any field . I know for fact the city I grew up in has a citywide restriction of no RC model planes are to be flown at public parks . Which , BTW , is a city ordinance and has exactly nothing to do with the FAA .......
11-18-2015, 04:17 AM
#287
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I figured as such with the trolling , since the FAA has no authority to refuse an order from DHS for a TFR . When the DHS orders a TFR , just because it's the FAA that announces the TFR to the flying publc , I'd still say it's the DHS that has closed the area since the FAA has no choice but to comply with the DHS' order . And yes Mike , the area is still closed which sucks in my opinion to loose any field . I know for fact the city I grew up in has a citywide restriction of no RC model planes are to be flown at public parks . Which , BTW , is a city ordinance and has exactly nothing to do with the FAA .......Mike
Last edited by rcmiket; 11-18-2015 at 04:21 AM.
11-18-2015, 04:34 AM
#288
I figured as such with the trolling , since the FAA has no authority to refuse an order from DHS for a TFR . When the DHS orders a TFR , just because it's the FAA that announces the TFR to the flying publc , I'd still say it's the DHS that has closed the area since the FAA has no choice but to comply with the DHS' order . Ah yes, the old someone else is a troll because I don't understand terminology and business processes. Nice.
And yes Mike , the area is still closed which sucks in my opinion to loose any field . I know for fact the city I grew up in has a citywide restriction of no RC model planes are to be flown at public parks . Which , BTW , is a city ordinance and has exactly nothing to do with the FAA .......Hopefully some may realize the frequent "field is still closed" reports aren't doing a damn thing to get the field reopened.
Just because a city enacts an ordinance doesn't mean it's legal and will hold up in court. Many a city have lost in court.
11-18-2015, 04:47 AM
#289
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-18-2015, 04:48 AM
#290
A good summary of cases where federal FAA preemption of state law was either upheld and not upheld.
http://airportnoiselaw.org/preempt.html
http://airportnoiselaw.org/preempt.html
Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 11-18-2015 at 04:51 AM.
11-18-2015, 06:31 AM
#291
That's a quote, not a link to a verifiable reference, but thanks anyway. I never said other entities couldn't "request" a TFR, my point was TFRs are only issued by the FAA. Perhaps some folks simply don't understand the business processes between a requesting entity and the issuing entity. For simplicity it certainly make sense for all the TFRs to be issued by one entity. Imagine if pilots had to go to multiple different websites to check TFRs issues by each entity.
11-18-2015, 06:42 AM
#292
But the writer's point was the operational requests come from a variety of sources - he was focusing on agencies that INITIATE the process. You were focusing on the end of the process. In that you were correct that FAA actually issues them, but they issue them IN RESPONSE TO requests by other agencies - the original author's point.
11-18-2015, 06:56 AM
#293
11-18-2015, 07:06 AM
#294
He stated issuer, not initiator. Why's so hard about a little technical accuracy? Inaccuracy only causes confusion and misunderstanding. It's the same thing you berate the AMA on every chance you get.
11-18-2015, 07:37 AM
#295
There's a big difference in holding an individual accountable for the precision of their language and holding an multi-million dollar organization accountable for the precision in their language -- especially when that multi-million dollar organization has spent our dues money on a professional PR person/firm to help them.
11-18-2015, 08:11 AM
#298
There's a big difference in holding an individual accountable for the precision of their language and holding an multi-million dollar organization accountable for the precision in their language -- especially when that multi-million dollar organization has spent our dues money on a professional PR person/firm to help them.
11-18-2015, 08:19 AM
#299
11-18-2015, 08:44 AM
#300
I argue there is a difference. For example, once an individual retains a lawyer, they can no longer assert ignorance of the law. So I argue that once an organization retains a PR firm/professional, they no longer have an excuse for imprecise language in statements by executives etc.