Senator would exempt Charter from rest rules
02-11-2011, 04:53 AM
#13
New Hire
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: PA28-181 Left
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by AK Hawg
Quote from the article:
"Senator Inhofe said he attempted to radio in to one of the workers at the airport to ask about the Xs before he landed, but the worker did not respond, so he landed anyway. He said he called the FAA himself to report the incident after he landed.
When he was leaving the fly back to Tulsa, Inhofe took off from the taxiway rather than the runway from which he should have taken off."
****!?!?!? Too bad there's not some sort of standard for airfield markings that might tell you what those big Xs mean! Maybe someone in congress should make a law governing the operation of aircraft and airplanes.
"Senator Inhofe said he attempted to radio in to one of the workers at the airport to ask about the Xs before he landed, but the worker did not respond, so he landed anyway. He said he called the FAA himself to report the incident after he landed.
When he was leaving the fly back to Tulsa, Inhofe took off from the taxiway rather than the runway from which he should have taken off."
****!?!?!? Too bad there's not some sort of standard for airfield markings that might tell you what those big Xs mean! Maybe someone in congress should make a law governing the operation of aircraft and airplanes.
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing By Glenn Pew, Contributing Editor, Video Editor
"Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) says he won't guarantee he'll be more vigilant about checking NOTAMs after he landed on a closed runway occupied by maintenance workers ten days ago in Texas. "People who fly a lot just don't do it," Inhofe told the Tulsa World. "I won't make any commitments." Inhofe added that while "technically" pilots should "probably" check NOTAMs, it would be impractical for him to do so on the many flights he makes to small airports in Oklahoma each year. The FAA has confirmed it is investigating the Oct 21 incident in which Inhofe landed a Cessna 340 on an occupied closed runway at Port Isabel-Cameron County Airport, Texas, He was reportedly carrying three others in the light twin when he made the landing on a runway bearing oversized painted Xs, a large red truck, other vehicles, and construction workers. The workers were using loud equipment at the time and didn't hear the plane's approach, so one person ran to warn them. A supervisor immediately reported the incident to the FAA and told TulsaWorld.com he was "still shaking" when he reached the hangar to confront the pilot. For his part, Inhofe said he didn't see the Xs until late on final and was concerned he might not be able to abort safely. He said he landed "well off to the side" of the workers. There were no injuries. A few days after his unorthodox arrival, Inhofe Saturday notified "an airport official" of his intent and used a taxiway for departure, according to The Washington Post. The senator has since spoken with the FAA and will "just wait and see what happens." That hasn't stopped him from offering reporters some form of explanation.
TulsaWorld.com reports that Inhofe said he was unaware of the runway's closure NOTAM because of "a bad relationship he has with one individual, who the Senator said declined to take his phone calls before the flight and did not tell him about the NOTAM." In the Washington Post's coverage, Inhofe said an airport official "hates me, I don't know why." The FAA's current interest is why the landing happened while the runway was clearly marked with the requisite oversized Xs. It will attempt to determine why Inhofe was apparently not aware of a NOTAM about the closure and investigate the circumstances of the taxiway departure. The airport has four runways but according to AirNav all except the main one (13/31) are in poor condition. In his 50 years as a pilot, Inhofe has experienced at least two other publicized incidents. In 1999, Inhofe suffered an emergency landing when his aircraft lost its propeller, and in 2006 he ground-looped a Vans RV-8 built by his son."
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing
02-11-2011, 05:24 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,903
Originally Posted by Patuxent78
Better yet is his explanation of the events and how he could care less about either the NOTAMS or the fact that there were workers on the runway when he laneded. Worthless!
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing By Glenn Pew, Contributing Editor, Video Editor
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing By Glenn Pew, Contributing Editor, Video Editor
FAA Investigating Senator Inhofe's Closed Runway Landing
More of your tax dollars wasted on an empty suit who feels he is above the law, or prehaps he feels that he's more equal than others.
02-11-2011, 09:43 AM
#16
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 68
Inhofe is supporting the position of the NACA carriers, who claim that supplemental pilots fly fewer hours and get more sleep than scheduled carrier pilots. 
Here's a copy of the NACA testimony from last September:
http://republicans.transportation.ho...-16-Brooks.pdf
Here's a copy of the NACA testimony from last September:http://republicans.transportation.ho...-16-Brooks.pdf
02-11-2011, 08:09 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Floatin' down the river in a old tube smilin'
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by Elvis90
ALPA has a standard e-mail response for Senator Inhofe's amendment. I've sent the letter to both my senators to oppose this particular provision of the bill.
CAPA | The Coalition of Airline Pilots Association
02-12-2011, 10:28 AM
#19
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Tiller Twisting; Yoke Strangling; Button Smashing - Switch Monkey
Posts: 82
What a bone headed idea. I totally agree with Deespatcher ... The fact that they operate unscheduled and longer days is EXACTLY why this should apply.
02-12-2011, 03:10 PM
#20
Rubber dogsh#t out of HKG
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Senior Seat Cushion Tester Extraordinaire
Posts: 620
According to the website Republican.Senate.Gov website, an excerpt of Senator Inhofe's statement to the Senate on Feb 3, 2011.
NTSB Conclusive Report on a World Airways Accident on May 6,2009...a little less than 15 years ago.
DCA09FA048
Later in the report;
Anyway, I sent a message to Inhofe pointing out the inaccuracy of his floor statement and urging him to issue a public retraction (I won't hold my breath). I also contacted my own Senator.
"Let me just make one comment about the two amendments I have on the bill. I think it is important that we address one of them, both of them, but one of them in particular is very significant. We have a sub-s version of the FAR's that affects scheduled and nonscheduled airlines. A scheduled airline can live with the crew rest and the flight rest and duty because they can adjust their schedules to do that. The unscheduled cannot. So the sub-s in the FAR's today allows a sub-s to work longer hours but they also have longer rest hours in between. They average out actually with longer rest hours for active hours than under the law that affects the scheduled airlines."
o SUMMARY "In 15 years, there has not been one case where an accident on a nonscheduled airline has taken place due to fatigue of anyone. So it's a problem that doesn't exist, and I’ve always had this hang-up about fixing things that aren't broke. So consequently, I’m hoping that we'll be able to keep that. What’s happening today is there is a comment period and a rule that would do away with the sub-s, and this is why I’d like to have this amendment in here. This bill would keep that from happening."
o SUMMARY "In 15 years, there has not been one case where an accident on a nonscheduled airline has taken place due to fatigue of anyone. So it's a problem that doesn't exist, and I’ve always had this hang-up about fixing things that aren't broke. So consequently, I’m hoping that we'll be able to keep that. What’s happening today is there is a comment period and a rule that would do away with the sub-s, and this is why I’d like to have this amendment in here. This bill would keep that from happening."
less than 15 years ago.DCA09FA048
The captain’s flight and duty schedule complied with Federal Aviation regulations, but he experienced a demanding 10-day trip schedule prior to the incident involving multiple time zone crossings and several long duty periods, and reported difficulties sleeping prior to the accident leg. The captain was likely further affected by a digestive system upset during the accident flight. It is likely that the captain’s performance was degraded by fatigue and some degree of physical discomfort brought on by a short-term illness.
Contributing to the inappropriate control inputs was the captain’s fatigue and physical discomfort; and a possible lack of practical consolidation of skills and experience due to a protracted and fragmented training period.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
