The discussions on the forum about the FARs, FAA and the potential legal entanglements has motivated me to take a look at my own operations and what I can do to be legal. It is clear that the regs are ever changing, complicated and subject to interpretation.

One of the resources I recalled is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS), administered by NASA. ASRS would probably be of little help to aktahoe1, but it does seem to be something to take a look at. I started flying well before the inception of ASRS, but have only used it once or twice.

It would be interesting to hear what others think of the ASRS system and how it has been used and how the immunity provisions have held up in real life situations with the FAA.

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/

Mauleace, I deal with this crap all the time at work. The airlines call them FSAPs, but they're actually the same NASA forms that everybody else uses. We file an FSAP, it goes to a review commitee and a secretary files a NASA form. I have never heard of the FAA not accepting an FSAP, but I have heard many times where they will not accept a NASA because of the of the catch-all gotcha: intentional act. It has to be an accidental transgression or they wad it up. I've also seen them blow off the 10 day time limit and file on the day they contact the evil deed doer, but again only if it's inadvertant. As to my thoughts from seeing it in action for 18 years....It's a great program when it works. The FSAP thing ( a relatively recent concept) is awesome because it seems to have fewer loopholes. I've also seen guys get burned on NASAs for bizarre stuff, like overflying suitable airports or not writing up marginally broken compenents . Even if you do get them to accept it you still get violated, you just don't have to serve up your ticket.

So AK would probably be SOL with a NASA .

Best Regards.

From AvWeb

August 5, 2008

Controllers As Airspace Police?

By Russ Niles, Editor-in-Chief

If you've ever missed a turn, set the altitude bug incorrectly or committed any of thousands of sins that air traffic controllers routinely catch and help correct every day without much fuss, those days are apparently over. The FAA has apparently ordered controllers to violate pilots for any and all errors and has threatened to discipline them if they don't file the reports. While the FAA says it's just enforcing rules already in place, the head of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association say it's yet another burden on an already-overworked workforce that will pit controllers against pilots. "We are not the FAA police! The FAA's and controller's mission is to provide the safe and efficient movement of live air traffic," said NATCA President Patrick Forrey. "The fact that the FAA is now disciplining controllers for not 'policing' pilot actions as they relate to flight regulations is indicative of the tyrannical and oppressive culture the FAA has created." The FAA, as might be suspected, has a different view.

In an e-mail to AVweb, FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said it's alway been controllers' jobs to report pilot infractions and she stressed there has been no change in FAA policy in this regard. However, in a quote from an unnamed senior staff member in the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) it's clear that reporting infractions is now being stressed. "The bottom line is there has been no change in ATC requirements just reinforcing the reporting piece," Brown quoted one of the ATO managers as saying. For the record, controllers are supposed to write up errors and supply supporting evidence to the FSDO manager and the decision to sanction pilots is made there. Make sure those clearances and readbacks are clear ... .


Gump