Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > General Discussion
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Register FAQ Members List Donate Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-27-2011, 10:12 AM   #1
Ironfish
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24
Thanks: 1
Thanked 32 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNoonans View Post
I combed the FAA website by the way and could not find a "Safety and Standards Branch". Did the FAA create a new division and not tell anyone?
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...p/offices/aas/

.... located at the FAA headquarters in Washington DC.
Ironfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 10:22 AM   #2
TheNoonans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Daytona Beach, FL - Bedford, NH
Posts: 136
Thanks: 0
Thanked 219 Times in 57 Posts
Default Skydive Laconia

Thank you!

It's a sub division of Airports Division.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom
TheNoonans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 01:07 PM   #3
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,802
Thanks: 759
Thanked 1,468 Times in 1,024 Posts
Default

I thought I heard on WASR today that the FAA rejected it. Am I wrong?
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 02:04 PM   #4
TheNoonans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Daytona Beach, FL - Bedford, NH
Posts: 136
Thanks: 0
Thanked 219 Times in 57 Posts
Default Skydive Laconia

Quote:
I thought I heard on WASR today that the FAA rejected it. Am I wrong?
You are correct that our second landing area proposal was rejected. I apologize if my last post on the report itself wasn't clearer on that. The ADO rejected our proposal and that is the report I presume WASR was referencing.

Bear in mind, as I have said before, the ADO, while under the umbrella of the FAA does not constitute a unified FAA rejection. Flight Standards is ultimately the branch of the FAA that will rule on this. We're just patiently waiting.

There is an article on the rejection/report here:

What's kind of humorous to people in our industry is the quote from Michel Hovan stating that because there is no tower, and pilots are required to apply 'See and avoid" procedures, that its too much to ask to be able to "See and Avoid" skydivers. It is completely contradictory to every operational precedent that Flight Standards provides for. Like I said, kind of funny when one branch of the FAA sets out to completely contradict another branch.

Anyways, the report is no surprise.

Neither is the fact that the Citizen and WASR got a copy of it the same day we did......... The LAA, who never wants to send us anything in a timely manner apparently mass blasted this report to as many people and news outlets that they could find.........lol

I'd suggest they were probably doing cart wheels when they got it.......lol.

So, this round is over.

Next one is just beginning. The "Laconia Situation" as it is being referred to by the FAA is building steam in Washington.

It's going to get pretty interesting in the next few months, that's for sure.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom
TheNoonans is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TheNoonans For This Useful Post:
RLW (04-27-2011), Seaplane Pilot (04-27-2011), trfour (04-27-2011)
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.36880 seconds