Originally published at: FAA Weighs Ultralight Access Dispute At California Airport
Ultralight pilots said local restrictions effectively shut them out of the airport.
Maybe if the ultralight community in general had not EARNED a reputation as cowboys and pirates, as anarchists of the air, and accumulated a horrific accident record from careless construction and reckless operation they would be welcomed rather than scrutinized and, perhaps, unevenly restricted. This casual undisciplined UL ethos including mocking, disrespect for regulationshas unfortunately now been allowed to pollute and dumb down the sport pilot community by crediting UL hours and welcoming UL “instructors” as near equals which will ultimately adversely impact that sector’s safety record and on up the chain.
Ahh yes…the wooden shoes of aviation. Is it still a thing?
So, flying machines of all types should have a place to fly, as long as everyone follows the rules.
Freedom is whats at risk here! Freedom is the right to be stupid the right to break the rules etc… The consequences of abusing freedom is what should be regulated.
Well, it is all about risk. The higher the risk, the greater the cost for the airport operator. If you want to keep costs down and play with the big boys, stricter regulation of “pilots” needs to be implemented. Airworthiness standards also need to be tightened up. The North American safety record is inferior to that of countries that have implemented stricter, more far-reaching regulations. Stricter pilot certification and enforced regulations governing design and construction of ultralight aircraft would improve the safety record of the sport.
It has been over 20 years, but I have been to Yuba County Airport and believe it is still not that busy. Or, the airport operators are trying to squeeze everyone for more funds. With past FAA funding, the airport should get their hands slapped, thank you very much! Ultralights everywhere and forever!!! Because autos are trash. Figuratively, step on 2D people everywhere you can!!! Help get rid of the lazy asses!!! Not wanting to fly and relieve the over crowded freeways!!! I-80 in and around Sacramento is a traffic jam travesty!!! Ugly people living in ugly conditions! And no reason for it!
On one hand, the Airport is expected to allow an aeronautical device to operate. On the other hand, the FAA does not allow most ultralights to be listed on the based aircraft inventory because they don’t have tail numbers. So, when airports are being inundated with ultralights that cannot be added to their based inventory, they lose out on federal funding because it is in part determined from how many based aircraft that airport has. This is especially relevant when renting t-hangars. I cannot tell an ultralight no (based on loose FAA guidance) but get no benefit from renting to them. It is a problem that the FAA needs to recognize.
The article neglects to mention the Petition against ultralights due to safety and FAA’s own regulations, already signed by over 70 people within a couple of weeks, many of whom are life flight helicopter pilots or retired military. Most like ultralights but Ultralights at Yuba County Airport is TOO dangerous. One UL ended up crashing into the fence. Another UL hung upside down for hours after getting caught in the electric lines. At least 5 incidents of near misses - almost fatal, almost like the military helicopter and commercial airline in DC.
The letter from EAA was prompted by misinformation from one person saying he represented the Yuba County EAA chapter. He did not. That same individual has been seen taxiing his UL all over the airport in a crazy, dangerous, childish manner.
If you’d like to sign the Petition, please email editor@chuckyeager.com
I have an aircraft based at KMYV, and the proposed UL routes have them cross rwy 14 1,000 ft from the approach end at 500 ft or below, well within a normal approach altitude.
The other transition is crazy, crossing mid-field at 500 ft or below, in direct conflict with departing aircraft.
This plan will just about guarantee an accident/ crash.