Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 23, 2019, 06:09:44 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

 11 
 on: Yesterday at 01:44:30 AM 
Started by etodd - Last post by etodd


Do you envision a MOU with the FAA that would allow recreation UAS qualified operators to fly quasi commercial missions like crewed aircraft?

Really not sure what you are asking. Iím not interested in recreational flyers. CAP sUAS Mission Pilots are Part 107.

 12 
 on: Yesterday at 01:28:22 AM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by OldGuy
Does CAP in WAWG perform functions related to the criminal investigation of inadmissibles and alien residents?
In years past we have flown counter drug missions here in WAWG. Those are often near the (Canadian) border and have had a CBP nexus. There have been some recent discussion of resuming those flight.

 13 
 on: Yesterday at 12:41:47 AM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by PHall
The airport might have a loop hole here. They're not denying the ICE chartered aircraft permission to land, they just revoked permission for that one company to operate out of the field. Plus they can always land at McChord or Whidbey Island. Both federally owned and operated. Unless DHS is trying to provoke something here.
US Bureau of Prisons flights, aka Con Air, operate out of military airfields all of the time. They like the enhanced security of a military airfield..

 14 
 on: May 21, 2019, 11:21:44 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by NIN
Oh dear.

I assume that airport has been the recipient of Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Grants. Denying a legitimate aviation activity access to a publicly funded airport tends to cause the FAA to want their money back....


 15 
 on: May 21, 2019, 10:52:45 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by TheSkyHornet
We had an aircraft recently that incurred a bird strike on final approach into EWR. The pilot reported that he did not see the bird, but heard the impact on the wing. Once the plane made it onto the ground, maintenance was called over to take a look at the damage. The mechanic stated that the damage had no signs of a wildlife impact and suggested a drone. He called our operations center to describe the damage as it appeared and took photos. Our maintenance controllers concurred that it was not a wildlife strike. The pilot reiterated that he did not see what caused the damage but only heard it and felt a slight impact. He did not concur as to what caused the damage as he did not want to make any false accusation or assumption given the nature of the inquiry. The FAA was notified of a potential bird strike and potential drone strike with the damage resulting from an unknown/unconfirmed aerial object.

A non-wildlife impact while on final approach between 500-1000 feet AGL on approach into Newark over a densely populated area...

That's a pretty big deal. What if that was an engine ingestion or windscreen impact, or impacted the flaps and not the outboard leading edge of the wing? What if that contributed to a flight control failure at that altitude? This is a huge safety concern. This isn't someone in their backyard throwing a Frisbee here to roof height.


 16 
 on: May 21, 2019, 10:40:14 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by Live2Learn
Conjecture on my part ... but I'd bet hard cash that this "limiting" of recreational is coming from a lot of hardline pushing by lobbyists from Amazon and others that are trying to carve out the airspace for their commercial package delivery usage. 

"Shove those drones out into the county fields alongside the model airplane folks".

I don't see that connection.  How'd you arrive at it? 

There are lots of reasons why UAS recreational ops in B, C, D, & E (to the surface) could or should be by permission.  If towers over 200 feet, guyed met towers over 50 feet, etc. etc require FAA review why not not drones?  Or that recreationists who fly what some argue are hobby devices (that often look, fly, and have the same KE as commercial UAS aircraft) should have minimum core competencies?

 17 
 on: May 21, 2019, 10:35:05 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by TheSkyHornet
Does CAP in WAWG perform functions related to the criminal investigation of inadmissibles and alien residents?

 18 
 on: May 21, 2019, 10:32:44 PM 
Started by etodd - Last post by Live2Learn
If your Wing is not rolling it out yet and your Wing Commander isn't informing you of the process and what documents to use, etc. ..... then don't worry about it for now. Its simply not time for you yet.

Do you envision a MOU with the FAA that would allow recreation UAS qualified operators to fly quasi commercial missions like crewed aircraft?

 19 
 on: May 21, 2019, 10:27:35 PM 
Started by Live2Learn - Last post by Live2Learn
https://www.kuow.org/stories/two-washington-airports-risk-millions-in-funding-if-they-dont-cooperate-with-ice

I wonder if this dustup might affect positioning of CAP aircraft?  Or other Federal aviation assets?  Other Washington cities are attempting to limit enforcement of Federal immigration law on surface transportation modes.

 20 
 on: May 21, 2019, 06:55:28 PM 
Started by etodd - Last post by CAP9907
..... then don't worry about it for now. Its simply not time for you yet.


You've made my point better than I ever could have

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.048 seconds with 20 queries.