Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Federal Funding

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

knowvne(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: Federal Funding

How does some one determine if a field has received or is receiving 

federal funding ?



Is there a list of fields some place for the public to review??



Â Mark



--

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:55 am Post subject: Federal Funding

By default, any airport designated as public is required to allow any

aircraft to use it's services. This includes ultralights.  (If a

private airport, designated for public use, has never taken federal or

state funding, then they have the right to deny services, but how will

you know until you land there?)  If a public airport owner can make a

case to the FAA to disallow certain aircraft for particular reasons,

then portions of or all services can be denied.  That information, as

far as I understand it, is supposed to be published in the AFD

(Airport/Facility Directory) for public use airports, so, if  you're

at all concerned, then refer to the AFD for the airport you're

interested in.



  -- Robert

On 7/3/07, Mark Vaughn <knowvne(at)aol.com> wrote:

[quote] 



 How does some one determine if a field has received or is receiving

 federal funding ?



 Is there a list of fields some place for the public to review??



 Mark



 --

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

knowvne(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:50 am Post subject: Federal Funding

Interesting...



I would have never guess the AFD would have listed such info... I'll 

take a look...



Thanks



Â Mark Vaughn



--

Ralph B

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 367
Location: Mound Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:31 am Post subject: Re: Federal Funding

"By default, any airport designated as public is required to allow any 

aircraft to use it's services. This includes ultralights."



These rules were written before Sport Pilot and the FAA has ignored overweight ultralights for many years. Everyone knows that an ultralight is a single seat no more than 254 lbs empty weight, flies no faster than 63mph, and has a 5-gallon fuel capacity.



Under the new rules, any aircraft (air vehicle) that doesn't meet this standard should be registered with the FAA. This means all overweight fixed-wings, trikes, and PPC's.



After the deadline, the FAA will be able to keep overweight unregistered ultralights out of airports. Already we are seeing signs going up at our airports stating this.



If your machine is overweight and not registered after the deadline, your flights may be limited to private fields only.



Ralph

_________________
Ralph B

Kolb Kolbra 912uls
N20386
550 hours

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:51 am Post subject: Federal Funding

I'm sure you're right, Ralph.  My statement would be more accurate to

have said: "...any airport designated as public is required to allow

any FAA recognized aircraft to use it's services.  This includes a

valid FAR 103 ultralight."



BTW, take a picture of one of those new signs and send it to me... I'm

really curious!



  -- Robert



On 7/3/07, Ralph B <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 "By default, any airport designated as public is required to allow any

 aircraft to use it's services. This includes ultralights."



 These rules were written before Sport Pilot and the FAA has ignored overweight ultralights for many years. Everyone knows that an ultralight is a single seat no more than 254 lbs empty weight, flies no faster than 63mph, and has a 5-gallon fuel capacity.



 Under the new rules, any aircraft (air vehicle) that doesn't meet this standard should be registered with the FAA. This means all overweight fixed-wings, trikes, and PPC's.



 After the deadline, the FAA will be able to keep overweight unregistered ultralights out of airports. Already we are seeing signs going up at our airports stating this.



 If your machine is overweight and not registered after the deadline, your flights may be limited to private fields only.



 Ralph



 --------

 Ralph B

 Original Firestar

 20 years flying it





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122020#122020

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:58 am Post subject: Federal Funding

Mark -- 



Below is a snapshot of a A/FD entry for an airport just south of me... note the "no touch and go nighttime lngs"...  that's a restriction that either they asked the FAA for, or the FAA told them they had to abide by.  I've seen other A/FD entries for "No ultralight activities" but can't put my finger on one right now. 



As I mentioned, if an airport owner can make a good case, the FAA will add the restriction.  Sometimes, the FAA sees an issue (like a noise sensitive area) and will compel the airport to comply and will publish it in the A/FD, as shown in this excerpt. 



 

 [img]cid:part1.05060408.04050107(at)cavediver.com[/img]

moz-screenshot-32.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

43.43 KB

Viewed:

371 Time(s)

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

knowvne(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:19 am Post subject: Federal Funding

Hmmmmm



Does having to Relieve ones self in the worst way qualify as an 

emergency??? hahahahahaha 



Thanks for the example..



Â Mark Vaughn



--

Ralph B

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 367
Location: Mound Minnesota

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:35 pm Post subject: Re: Federal Funding

I'm sure you're right, Ralph. My statement would be more accurate to 

have said: "...any airport designated as public is required to allow 

any FAA recognized aircraft to use it's services. This includes a 

valid FAR 103 ultralight." 



BTW, take a picture of one of those new signs and send it to me... I'm 

really curious! 



-- Robert



Robert, here's your picture of the warning sign at the Red Wing airport.

Here is what it says as it's hard to read with the way the camera took it on the inside of the glass:



WARNING



Any aircraft operating at the Red Wing Regional Airport not displaying a registration number nor meeting the definition of an ultralight vehicle

will be reported to the Federal Aviation Administration for enforcement action. An ultralight vehicle is defined as a vehicle that:



Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant

 

Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only



Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate, and:



If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds, or if powered, weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation.



Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons.



Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight, and:



Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed.



If your ultralight does not meet the above definition, it must be operated in accordance with applicable aircraft regulations. You will be subject to enforcement actions ($1000 civil penalty for each violation) for each operation of this aircraft.



Tom Blue, Caretaker

Red Wing Regional Airport



Ralph B

airport warning sign.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

44.14 KB

Viewed:

372 Time(s)

Ed in JXN

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 122

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 5:03 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

This "caretaker" sounds fascist IMHO.  This is what happens when folks don't 

speak out.

The vast majority of airports are UL-friendly, or at least tolerant.  I 

operate out of PTK (Pontiac, MI, tower-controlled) in GA aircraft, and there 

are several ultralights based there.  The UL guys go out of their way to 

comply, some even use radios!



Ed in JXN

MkII/503

---

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 5:42 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

Interesting (if not a little disgusting)... but how, I wonder, does he

magically discern the weight of a single-seat UL, not to mention the

speed, etc...?  And, does he not honor the FAA exemption for UL

trainers?  There's no mention of that!



I'll bet his mistress is named Eva and he wears brown shirts, eh?



  -- Robert

On 7/3/07, Ralph B <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I'm sure you're right, Ralph. My statement would be more accurate to

 have said: "...any airport designated as public is required to allow

 any FAA recognized aircraft to use it's services. This includes a

 valid FAR 103 ultralight."



 BTW, take a picture of one of those new signs and send it to me... I'm

 really curious!



 -- Robert



 Robert, here's your picture of the warning sign at the Red Wing airport.

 Here is what it says as it's hard to read with the way the camera took it on the inside of the glass:



 WARNING



 Any aircraft operating at the Red Wing Regional Airport not displaying a registration number nor meeting the definition of an ultralight vehicle

 will be reported to the Federal Aviation Administration for enforcement action. An ultralight vehicle is defined as a vehicle that:



 Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant



 Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only



 Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate, and:



 If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds, or if powered, weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation.



 Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons.



 Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight, and:



 Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed.



 If your ultralight does not meet the above definition, it must be operated in accordance with applicable aircraft regulations. You will be subject to enforcement actions ($1000 civil penalty for each violation) for each operation of this aircraft.



 Tom Blue, Caretaker

 Red Wing Regional Airport



 Ralph B





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122083#122083





 Attachments:



 http://forums.matronics.com//files/airport_warning_sign_148.jpg

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:48 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

Robert, There is no such thing as an unlicensed ultralight trainer after Jan 31, 2008. After that you have to find a Sport Pilot CFI and a certificated LSA. If it's in the aircraft's operating limitations, an E-LSA can be used for training until Jan 31, 2010. After that it will be only S-LSA that can be used for training. 



Rick

On 7/3/07, Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com (rlaird(at)cavediver.com)> wrote:[quote] --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Robert Laird" <rlaird(at)cavediver.com (rlaird(at)cavediver.com)>



Interesting (if not a little disgusting)... but how, I wonder, does he

magically discern the weight of a single-seat UL, not to mention the 

speed, etc...?  And, does he not honor the FAA exemption for UL

trainers?  There's no mention of that!



I'll bet his mistress is named Eva and he wears brown shirts, eh?



  -- Robert

 On 7/3/07, Ralph B <ul15rhb(at)juno.com (ul15rhb(at)juno.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ralph B" <ul15rhb(at)juno.com (ul15rhb(at)juno.com)>

 

 I'm sure you're right, Ralph. My statement would be more accurate to

 have said: "...any airport designated as public is required to allow

 any FAA recognized aircraft to use it's services. This includes a 

 valid FAR 103 ultralight."



 BTW, take a picture of one of those new signs and send it to me... I'm

 really curious!



 -- Robert



 Robert, here's your picture of the warning sign at the Red Wing airport. 

 Here is what it says as it's hard to read with the way the camera took it on the inside of the glass:



 WARNING



 Any aircraft operating at the Red Wing Regional Airport not displaying a registration number nor meeting the definition of an ultralight vehicle 

 will be reported to the Federal Aviation Administration for enforcement action. An ultralight vehicle is defined as a vehicle that:



 Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant 



 Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only



 Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate, and:



 If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds, or if powered, weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation. 



 Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons.



 Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight, and:



 Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed. 



 If your ultralight does not meet the above definition, it must be operated in accordance with applicable aircraft regulations. You will be subject to enforcement actions ($1000 civil penalty for each violation) for each operation of this aircraft. 



 Tom Blue, Caretaker

 Red Wing Regional Airport



 Ralph B





 Read this topic online here:



  http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122083#122083





 Attachments:



 http://forums.matronics.com//files/airport_warning_sign_148.jpg 

"Ya'll drop on in"
	


takes on a whole new meaning

when you live at the airport.  [quote][b]

DAquaNut(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:43 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

In a message dated 7/3/2007 12:32:52 PM Central Standard Time, ul15rhb(at)juno.com writes: 

 

 

 	  Quote: 	
		  After the deadline, the FAA will be able to keep overweight unregistered ultralights out of airports. Already we are seeing signs going up at our airports stating this. 

 

If your machine is overweight and not registered after the deadline, your flights may be limited to private fields only. 

 

Ralph 	
 

 

               Ralph, 

 

         An aircraft that weighs more than 254 with a single seat is not an overweight ultralight. It is an illegal aircraft , if you dont have a license to fly and must be registered. On the other hand if the craft meets ALL requirements for an ultralight then it should be legal as a true ultralight today or after the deadline.  The FAA  has had the authority ,all along, to keep (    overweight unregistered ultralights) from flying anywhere in the USA .  It is my understanding that FAR 103 will not change at all.  I see  " SPORT PILOT" as the solution to force everyone to comply with the rules that have been in place all along.  Do the signs you are refering to address   Legal Ultralights?   My original comment was pertaining to Legal Ultralights. 

 

          Ed Diebel

**************************************

 See what's free at http://www.aol.com.  [quote][b]

rlaird

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Houston

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:33 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

Yup, well aware of that, but the sign exists now, so, I was just

wondering why the "caretaker" wasn't taking care of -current- UL

trainers.



On 7/3/07, Richard Girard <jindoguy(at)gmail.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Robert, There is no such thing as an unlicensed ultralight trainer after Jan

 31, 2008. After that you have to find a Sport Pilot CFI and a certificated

 LSA. If it's in the aircraft's operating limitations, an E-LSA can be used

 for training until Jan 31, 2010. After that it will be only S-LSA that can

 be used for training.



 Rick

 On 7/3/07, Robert Laird <rlaird(at)cavediver.com> wrote:

 > 

 >

 >

 > Interesting (if not a little disgusting)... but how, I wonder, does he

 > magically discern the weight of a single-seat UL, not to mention the

 > speed, etc...?  And, does he not honor the FAA exemption for UL

 > trainers?  There's no mention of that!

 >

 > I'll bet his mistress is named Eva and he wears brown shirts, eh?

 >

 >   -- Robert

 >

 >

 > On 7/3/07, Ralph B <ul15rhb(at)juno.com> wrote:

 > > 

 > >

 > > I'm sure you're right, Ralph. My statement would be more accurate to

 > > have said: "...any airport designated as public is required to allow

 > > any FAA recognized aircraft to use it's services. This includes a

 > > valid FAR 103 ultralight."

 > >

 > > BTW, take a picture of one of those new signs and send it to me... I'm

 > > really curious!

 > >

 > > -- Robert

 > >

 > > Robert, here's your picture of the warning sign at the Red Wing airport.

 > > Here is what it says as it's hard to read with the way the camera took

 it on the inside of the glass:

 > >

 > > WARNING

 > >

 > > Any aircraft operating at the Red Wing Regional Airport not displaying a

 registration number nor meeting the definition of an ultralight vehicle

 > > will be reported to the Federal Aviation Administration for enforcement

 action. An ultralight vehicle is defined as a vehicle that:

 > >

 > > Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a

 single occupant

 > >

 > > Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only

 > >

 > > Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate, and:

 > >

 > > If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds, or if powered, weighs less

 than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are

 intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation.

 > >

 > > Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons.

 > >

 > > Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power

 in level flight, and:

 > >

 > > Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated

 airspeed.

 > >

 > > If your ultralight does not meet the above definition, it must be

 operated in accordance with applicable aircraft regulations. You will be

 subject to enforcement actions ($1000 civil penalty for each violation) for

 each operation of this aircraft.

 > >

 > > Tom Blue, Caretaker

 > > Red Wing Regional Airport

 > >

 > > Ralph B

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > Read this topic online here:

 > >

 > >

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=122083#122083

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > Attachments:

 > >

 > >

 http://forums.matronics.com//files/airport_warning_sign_148.jpg

 > "Ya'll drop on in"

 > takes on a whole new meaning

 > when you live at the airport.

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

 >

_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Laird
formerly: MkIIIc w/ 912ULS & Gyrobee
current: Autogyro Cavalon w/ 914ULS
Houston, TX area
http://www.Texas-Flyer.com

planecrazzzy
Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:16 am Post subject: Re: Federal Funding

Something that wasn't mentioned about Red Wing Airport....



 There are 3M "Jets" that Fly out of there.....I SURE that has something

to do with not wanting UL's buzzing around....



 I'm sure there has been "Situations"



 I'm flying there Thursday morning to get my Transponder Cert.



 $75 for the Transponder & $75 for the Alt Encoder (cheapest I've Found)



Gotta Fly...

Mike & "Jaz" in MN - FSII / N381PM

.

.

.

.

JetPilot

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 10:54 am Post subject: Re: Federal Funding

 	  planecrazzzy wrote: 	
		  



I'm flying there Thursday morning to get my Transponder Cert.



 $75 for the Transponder & $75 for the Alt Encoder (cheapest I've Found)



Gotta Fly...

Mike & "Jaz" in MN - FSII / N381PM

.

.

.

. 	




Where did you find a transponder for 75 bucks ?



Mike

_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!

Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S

planecrazzzy
Guest

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 2:29 am Post subject: Re: Federal Funding

.

If you read it again....I'm getting it Certified....



 So , for $150 bucks....I'm buying a Piece of Paper......

.

.

.

 Now, if you've got $1,500....You can Buy a "NEW" :

Narco AT 155 Transponder   w/AR850 Altitude Reporter



.

.

.

 Gotta Fly...

Mike & "Jaz" in MN

.

.

.

.

 	  JetPilot wrote: 	
		   	  planecrazzzy wrote: 	
		  



I'm flying there Thursday morning to get my Transponder Cert.



 $75 for the Transponder & $75 for the Alt Encoder (cheapest I've Found)



Gotta Fly...

Mike & "Jaz" in MN - FSII / N381PM

.

.

.

. 	




Where did you find a transponder for 75 bucks ?



Mike

Transponder wiring loom.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

59.11 KB

Viewed:

365 Time(s)

d-m-hague(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:34 pm Post subject: Federal Funding

At 11:55 AM 7/3/2007, Robert Laird wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



By default, any airport designated as public is required to allow any

aircraft to use it's services. This includes ultralights.  (If a

private airport, designated for public use, has never taken federal or

state funding, then they have the right to deny services...


	


That's where the issue may arise.  Many airports are "privately owned for 

public use", and if these have received no federal funding they can deny 

landing to anybody, not just ultralights.  The airport I used to call home 

(N04, now sadly closed) was such an airport.  It was ultralight friendly, 

actually friendly to any aircraft that could deal with its 1800' strip, but 

required prior permission (which was always granted) from ALL transient 

aircraft.



Many small airports were originally WWII training or auxiliary 

fields.  That qualifies as "receiving federal funding" even if the original 

acquisition was the only dealing with the feds.



                                 -Dana



--

--

The only correct outcome to an armed robbery attempt is a dead armed robber.

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum