midlifeflyer

Boost pump off except for priming and emergencies is common (although not universal) the big Continentals. It's true for the Bonanzas as well. Not true for the SR22.

Question: are we talking about (a) basic FAA aircraft registration/renewal; (b) FAA-required registered agent services for those who do not have a US address, or (c) basic registered agent services to meet state corporate/company record requirements?

What’s wrong with snailmail or online (with digital signatures. Or let an escrow company take care of it (avoid errors)?

I have no doubt that they intentionally waited until loaded up. "Unrelated" was my word and I used it in the same real-world sense as the court: "a warrant that had been issued in connection with another investigation."

I definitely thought that until I saw that the court said the search warrant was unrelated.

I kind of suspect that too. They were obviously looking for something since there was an existing search warrant. Reading further into the case sort of leads me in a different direction altogether. I hope they take it - it's an important issue - but can just about see SCOTUS refusing the case for 'fishy.' We have a pilot who apparently has been the subject of surveillance at the airport for something unspecified. Even without more it makes the case less sympathetic. But, having been in that world, I don't have a problem with a jury finding that the pilot saw the same six pack the trooper says he saw through the window. Either way, that's what trials are about and unless you are there and hear the testimony live (even transcripts are a poor substitute) , you don't have the ability to judge the believability of the witnesses. There was a case a long time ago that led me to avoid second-guessing the factual strength of cases I am not directly involved with.

Definitely more than the Internet provides. After all, you said you found nothing with ChatGPT. Irene as informant? Sure, a possibility. But it doesn't make my spidey sense tingle Maybe I've been out of the criminal law biz too many years?

Oh, that. Helen was charged and pleaded guilty. As indicated the the quote I pasted, Helen was the only one going to Beaver. She was the only passenger. After loading and before the search, Irene drove away. Speculation: Could they have charged Irene with something? Probably, but police and prosecutor decided not to. Maybe they felt the evidence against her would be too weak or just too much bother. Sign of something fishy? Maybe. But it sounds normal to my ear.

d. I guess I don't understand your question.

Agreed. All the AI searches are very good so long as we understand they are mostly Cliff Notes whose author may not have read the whole book, and may have been looking at someone else's Cliff Notes as a source.

Does this help clear up the overall situation? It's from the first appeal (the case went from the state trial court to the Alaska Court of Appeals back to the trial court, again to the Court of Appeals and then to the Alaska Supreme Court) On the intent issue, often it's a knowledge issue. The pilot claimed that he didn't know there was alcohol. There was testimony that while that might have been true about some of the cases, he would have to be blind to have not seen the six pack in a plastic grocery bag in plain view. That's why he was only charged with the six-pack. Ultimately it's a fact issue for the jury, which found against him. Kenneth Jouppi and his wife were the two principals of Ken Air, LLC, and Jouppi was the only pilot working for Ken Air. On April 3, 2012, Alaska State Troopers were conducting surveillance of Jouppi and his airplane at the Fairbanks airport. The troopers were there to execute a search warrant for the airplane (a warrant that had been issued in connection with another investigation). As the troopers watched, two women—Helen Nicholia and Irene Todd—drove up to Jouppi's airplane. Jouppi was scheduled to fly Nicholia to Beaver, a local option village. Nicholia and Todd's vehicle contained several boxes and semi-transparent grocery bags. The troopers observed Jouppi opening and closing these boxes and bags, and redistributing their contents to fill up the containers. Jouppi then loaded this cargo into his airplane (with no assistance from the women). Some of the boxes that Jouppi loaded into the plane were open, and the others were loosely closed. Based on the way Jouppi was carrying the boxes, they appeared to be heavy. Once the plane was loaded, Helen Nicholia entered the plane on the copilot side. Jouppi got into the pilot's seat, started the engine, and prepared to take off. (The other woman, Irene Todd, drove away.) At this point, the troopers contacted Jouppi and had him shut off the engine. They then executed the search warrant.

The charge was "transporting." Generally speaking, "transporting" begins at the origin and ends at the destination. Use illegal drugs shipped from Columbia to the US as an example - where does "transport" take place? Only on arrival in the US? In terms of this particular statute, "'transport' means to ship by any method, and includes delivering or transferring or attempting or soliciting to deliver or transfer an alcoholic beverage to be shipped to, delivered to, or left or held for pickup by any person"

The problem of disproportional civil forfeiture has been a significant issue for a long time. Civil rights advocates point out that since these are civil cases, there’s no right to appointed counsel, so most go undefended. Basically a cheap way for states to raise revenue. (The Feds do it too but most of the ones I’ve seen personally have been big drug cases where drug proceeds funded the forfeited homes, cars, bank accounts, etc.) In 2019, SCOTUS said the Excessive Fines clause applied to civil forfeiture, and that the forfeiture can’t be “grossly disproportionate.” In that case, Timbs v Indiana, a guy had sold a few hundred dollars of heroin The state brought forfeiture proceedings against his car(*) in addition to criminal proceedings. Couple of things made it a good case for review. The car was not purchased with drug proceeds. The maximum criminal fine for the offense was $10,000. The car was a $42,000 Range Rover. And the trial court already found it to be excessive Many states have modified their forfeiture procedures. Some, including Alaska, have not, coming up with ways they claim theirs is not excessive. (Simplistically, the harm addressed by the statute rather than harm caused by this defendant.) One of the goals of seeking SCOTUS review is to get some guidelines on what are the elements to look at in deciding whether a forfeiture is disproportionate, which wasn’t done in the Indiana case. No predictions on how this SCOTUS will handle it or whether they will handle it at all, although I will mention the Indiana case was a unanimous decision. (*) yes, “against his car.” Technically, forfeiture proceedings are what the law refers to as “in rem” - “against the thing,” not the person who owns or has a legal interest in it.

Full flaps for me too unless I’m practicing landing without them. Love the post but had to chuckle at this. At the primary student pilot level, flaps are often a landing “crutch”, with students unable to control landing speed without them.

You should be okay on a ramp check, but I have seen mechanics who insist that they will not sign off an airplane as airworthy unless they see the POH in the airplane. Fortunately, since you will have it on your tablet, you can always put the hard copy somewhere in the baggage compartment instead of in a seat pocket.

I have not seen an official interpretation. It was an issue faced by an Ercoupe owner I knew under the pre-MOSAIC weight limitation rules. The pilot was told it was OK, but it was informal from some rep, so whether it represents official policy or not is something I don’t know.

"Legal" unless your navigator/FMS Limitations say no, although the truth is the GNS limitation is probably violated regularly. "Preferred?" Maybe. They do exist, but there are not too many airports in the U.S. where a VOR or LOC approach would be a better choice than an RNAV approach. In those cases, sure. Pink needles primary with green needles on a secondary CDI or a bearing pointer. But otherwise, it seems to me that the only time one would choose a VOR or LOC approach in real life is going to be during a GPS failure. That means, to me, from a proficiency standpoint, we are better off practicing VOR or LOC approaches green needles only, preferably with the GPS off or at least with the approach not loaded and on a non-map page. And if we're not going to practice that failure mode, don't bother practicing VOR or localizer approaches at all.

There’s also the shalt not in 91.9(a)

That’s true of Class B primaries as well.

Well, in the case of APA, it’s busier than many if not most Class C airports but is not radar controlled. When I moved to a nontowered airport in North Carolina, pilots told me they avoided RDU because it was “too busy.” I would laugh and point out that if you added RDU and GSO and added 100,000 annual ops, you’d have the APA numbers,

Avidyne: “GPS/SBAS based IFR enroute, oceanic, and terminal navigation is prohibited unless current Navigation and Procedure databases are installed.” The “debate” has two sides. Those who don’t read the POH and those who do

There was no fuss made by the DPE in that situation, the fuss was self-induced by the student. The DPE did not ask about the discrepancy, just wanted the applicant to fly the approach.

I am in the camp of, choose a gear operating SOP and stick with it. Always.

It's been a long time, but I once did an Angel Flight connection in Amarillo. I wanted to go into AMA, but the other pilot wanted to go into Tradewinds. I asked why, and he said it was because he wanted to avoid the busy Class Charlie airspace and prefer red the non-towered Tradewinds. I insisted on Amarillo because it had a restaurant, (TDW didn't have one then) so that if he was late, we would have a place to sit down and have some coffee. So we ended up at AMA where he and I were the only airplanes taking off or landing during the hour and a half we were there.