Getting out after 21 years

[legaleagle]

You should call AOPA. The FBO owner is way over his rights. See if the legal team can help you for free, if you are a member. That is uncalled for.

 

[MattC-140]

I feel that day is coming to more and more airports. Even the smaller ones I fly into don't have the same friendly feeling.

I'm in the process of building a private strip/hanger for the plane. Nothing beats taking off and landing while talking to no one and knowing that no one really cares, lots of freedom .

If the good ol' days in aviation are still here, I found it.

 

[LearLove]

Why can't you guys vote or show this crazy FBO with your wallets. Just move your planes to another airport and don't buy gas or MX from him.

Sorry to see you go thru this, the worst thing you can do is "get out". Then they win. I a year or 2 I hope to be an aircraft owner, please don't quit on us future owners now.

 

[avbug]

Perhaps you haven't provided the whole story here, but if I understand you correctly, your aircraft is moored on property leased by the FBO. If this is indeed the case, the FBO is within their rights to charge for the leased space. Additionally, if the FBO has been charged with establishing and maintaining security for all who pass through their property to access the airport, the FBO does have a right to the information they've requested from you.

You're entering onto the airport property under the security program as a guest of the FBO, or in other words, using the FBO's authorization to enter the field. The FBO is required to obtain information from you in order to sponsor you under their authorization. In most cases, this also means that the FBO is responsible for ensuring that you pass a security check (or for passing on the information to the airport or police who will provide the actual check). At a minimum, the FBO will need certain basic information from you for their own accountability in sponsoring you as a tennant, or subleased tennant.

Most airports, believe it or not, do not permit work on aircraft on the field unless you are licensed to do so by the municipality that oversees or regulates the field. You are generally required to carry a certain level of insurance for yourself and your vehicle, and often must have a facility in which to perform the maintenance. If the leaseholder for the tiedown or ramp area in which your aircraft is secured prevents you from doing maintenance, then you're in no different a boat than an apartment landlord that prevents maintenance on your car. You rent the apartment, but don't have a right under the lease to work on your car in the parking lot. That is very common; shouldn't come as a surprise at the airport.

I am an experienced wrench. I have a number of rollaway boxes shadowed with tools, books, materials, etc. I could make extra money equipping a truck to visit fields as a rolling shop, but most airfields won't permit it. Through the fence operations, private or commercial, are very often prohibited unless certain licensing fees are paid. The bottom line is that I can't cross the fence in many cases to work on someone's aircraft. On one level, I can understand why repair facilities on the field might see this as protecting their interests; after all, they pay rent and insurance to be able to do that. I shouldn't be able to cross the fence and take away from their business without the playing field being levelled.

Many fields don't allow the dumping of fuel, due to EPA concerns.

On the subject of washing; if the FBO is unable to offer the requisite training courses, then you certainly have a leg to stand upon in fighting for certain owner rights. You'll still need to show the proper training in waste water disposal, effects on the environment, appropriate chemicals and their use, etc.

Many fields have vehicle requirements and a field driver license. This is apart from any state-sanctioned driving privilege authorization. A test is usually taken covering driving rules and proceedures on the field, at the completion of a training course. These courses typically take one or two hours. Included in these courses are instructions on what field access points you can and can't use, requirements for stopping after crossing through gates until the gates are completely closed, and challenging those who appear suspicious or who fail to exhibit the proper ID. These regulations aren't new; these have been in effect for many, many years at a lot of locations.

Additionally, if the airport hasn't required it before, certain insurance minimum requirements are often established if you wish to drive your car on the field.

So you believe that telling the FBO where you work and providing them with already-public information regarding your FAA certification is too high a cost, do you? I'm sure that makes sense to you, but if that's the reason you're "giving up aviation after 21 years," I certainly don't believe you. I hear your frustration, but there is more to the story or you're just looking for an excuse to stop flying. None of this is new, and it's done every day all over the country. If indeed the FBO is the leaseholder for the tiedown area and the ramp, then the FBO is entitled to levy fees and establish operating parameters on their leased property. That you were already there is not relevant. That the FBO may require information of you to implement the security precautions with which they have been charged should be expected, and is nothing unusual. As a guest of the tennant, it is the tennants responsibility to ensure accountability for all whom they sponor with access to the field.

For this you are quitting? If you're giving away that airplane give me a call. I know just what to do with it.

 

[VFR on Top]

Darn ... even the red states are starting this crap. Please, don't tell me Epps is the culprit.

"Even" the red states? Son, the red states are where this sort of crap was INVENTED.

 

[wasp junior]

Blue or Red, I'm sickened by the fact that airports are evicting the very people who live the culture that I fell in love with...

Perhaps Nascar and Dirt tracks are next?

 

[Goose Egg]

Sure, this wouldn't be the "moral victory" that you were looking for, but what is so bad about just moving the airplane to another airport or another tiedown spot (like a competeing FBOs)? If the FBO wants to be such arsholes about it, then they can lose their $125 mo tiedown fee.

"...Pulled off the airport..." Now one has to wonder how they'd manage that! Through what gate? And where would they put it? In a parking lot? In a field? On the side of the road? I'm sure they'd be breaking some federal law by doing it.

At any rate, the FBO owner is being a jerk, and he should pay for it.

-Goose

 

[Doug]

I would imagine this is why operating out of a small airport that is owned by the pilots themselves would be best.

From what I understand, the airport I am taking lessons at was going tobe closed, but the pilots got together and purchased the airport. Now I think if you hangar a plane there you become part of the airportassociation or whatever, and everything is voted on. I wouldimagine this is the best way to go, try and find an airport likethat.

I have found that things are very relaxed there. I routinelystick around and watch planes and such take off after my lesson, andeven had to walk out to one of my planes because I forgot ot put thepen back in the glovebox, and no one assaulted me, sent me to gitmo,and called me a terrorist.

I remember the glory days of the observation deck too when I was young,but now at any "real" airport, those days are gone. I thinkthe above scenario is the best available.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Avbug:

You do a good job of outlining the other side of the argument. But what I think that you and others are overlooking is that we residents of this County built this airport over the years, with some financial help from the Federal Government. Our money, our labor and our patronage is why the airport is here to begin with. I literally built some of the airport infrastructure with my own hands.

This airport is very much in love with Gulfstreams. They desire to be an exclusive premium use facility. Us little guys are in the way, in same way the family farm gets in the way of a new WalMart Super Center. They want us gone and we will comply, or fight City Hall.

I'm not much on the idea of aviation being "exclusive." As an ATP with a quasi successful career, a great side business and a nice airplane I guess the locals were offering me an executive membership in this exclusive club. But, I remember fondly my days at the airport when I was 16 and traded my first car for a Piper Colt. The first airport official I met said "lets go flying." Now all that people see when they approach the airport is a fence and a sign telling them to "keep out."

I like the idea some people have posted about a fly in community, but I need an instrument approach to keep my schedule.

It all boils down to freedom and for now, taking the truck out on business makes more sense than being hassled at the airport.

~~~^~~~

 

[FN FAL]

....

Most airports, believe it or not, do not permit work on aircraft on the field unless you are licensed to do so by the municipality that oversees or regulates the field. You are generally required to carry a certain level of insurance for yourself and your vehicle, and often must have a facility in which to perform the maintenance.

I am an experienced wrench. I have a number of rollaway boxes shadowed with tools, books, materials, etc. I could make extra money equipping a truck to visit fields as a rolling shop, but most airfields won't permit it. Through the fence operations, private or commercial, are very often prohibited unless certain licensing fees are paid. The bottom line is that I can't cross the fence in many cases to work on someone's aircraft...

Actually, a lot of airports are restrictive against free lance flight instructors as well.