Trent Palmer Talks FAA Fight at Reno
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- (Please Subscribe!) Dan (@TakingOffDan) catches up with Trent Palmer @TrentonPalmer to talk about his case with the FAA-- what happened, where we're at right now, and where the case is headed.
Check out Trent's channel: / @trentonpalmer
TakingOff is sponsored by:
FlyingEyes - Get 10% using discount code TAKINGOFF at flyingeyesoptics.com/ We were customers before they became sponsors!
ColtenTakingOff.com www.coltenmortgage.com/takingoff - For your residential mortgage or refi needs. Run by a pilot!
67Designs- Cabin Mounts www.67d.com/ Incredibly rugged mounts for your tablets, smart phones and cameras in the airplane. Made in the US!
XeVision.com -Extreme LED Landing Lights, www.xevision.com the only competitor is the sun!
www.clemensinsurance.net/ - Your broker should be advocating on your behalf-call Clemens to have someone in your corner fighting for you!
Marshal Protective Services - mpsprotects.com/ Private Security Elevated!
Join our Hangar Club at takingoff.s-films.com for special previews and exclusive content.
Also, support Christy at Patreon @PilotChristy
The large METAR map on the set is from metarmaps.com/ Mention TakingOff as you go buy one!
The TakingOff Team uses Lightspeed Headsets. Support us by buying your Lightspeed through our link: www.lightspeedaviation.com/?r...
Once lawyers get involved, it’s no longer about right or wrong, it’s about “winning” at all costs and government has an open checkbook to have their way. Thanks Trent for not giving up!
This has nothing to do with lawyers. Replace lawyers in your statement with government and now your on track.
Also that open check book is taxpayer money! It very easy to spend taxpayers money!!!
It appears to me this is not about Trent anymore, it is about the FAA not wanting to admit they made a poor choice to continue this case against Trent. It would be very embarrassing to admit they made a mistake at this time. Now if the higher court changes their decision the FAA will be off the hook with no cake in their face. I believe your hard work will pay off .
This
You guys say there are a lot of good guys in the FAA... why the hell aren't they standing up?
Or, culpability is not even on their radar, no pun intended, harsh penalties for the unlucky first few, and this is just a death by a thousand cuts of our sovereignty.
@@generalsnickers1 That's easy. It's because they're meek and fearful of losing the main reason they work for the FAA in the first place: their FERS pension. Seriously, Occam's Razor, that's it.
Most are not pilots, the minority who are are airline re-treads who didn't want to incur the crap schedules of junior airline life, or were casualties of the frequent airline bust cycles, and decided to pivot into lower paying (GS-13+ is nothing to sneeze at though) but more steady work with banker's hours in areas of the country they wanted to live in anyways.
These are powerful motivators to be a head-down petty functionary who isn't gonna rock the boat, let alone go on what he/she would consider gratuitous "crusades" in the context of the bird in the hand that is their FERS payment in retirement. To wit, Cowardice is only illegal in the military. Put a gun to their head and threaten their pension if they don't answer categorically to these inquiries, and see how many miraculously find their lost spine...
This is exactly what the FAA want. They want to make any appeal so painful and expensive that people just roll over.
This situation needs to be taken to a real court of law and these unelected governmental figures need to be held accountable and punished for their blatant violation of law and due process and individual rights.
I think they want pilots to not buzz houses and be able to say they were just doing an inspection pass as an excuse.
@@reason6835nice try
@@vibratingstring That’s EXACTLY what the legal precedent would be had Trent won his case.
@reason6835 You are forgetting that Trent was invited to land there by the property owner. There would be no precedent set for arbitrarily buzzing houses due to the invitation.
@@dustyrhoads2602: That’s irrelevant. Homeowners can’t give you permission to violate FAA Regulations.
Since Trent has taken on the FAA for all pilots, where can we donate for Trent’s legal fund? A win for Trent is a win for all. It’s worth it to me to send a gift equal to a couple hours of flight time.
I was a 25 year plus member of the Aopa and when they sided with the FAA on this Trent Palmer affair I told them, not a penny more.
AOPA has gone woke and it’s probably time to hit them in the pocket book.
I’m not a big Trent Palmer fan but this is an egregious overstep by the FAA and the Aopa was in lock step with them.
@@paddylofossI didn’t realize the AOPA sided with the FAA so I did some searching and I can’t seem to find what you’re talking about, Trent is using a lawyer from the AOPA. They have also released several statements in support of him. Can you point me to what led you to think they are siding with the FAA?
I believe this is advertising.
After seeing this latest update, I had the same thought - this isn't Trent's battle, it's a battle for all pilots. Trent obviously has a good income, however he should not have to carry the cost by himself. We will all lose if he loses. Trent, set up a GoFundMe or other donation fund. I don't have a lot to give, but I will certainly donate. As mentioned, this affects all pilots, from PPG all the way to commercial... we need to provide what support we can.
@@hansssnet right after this incident, the AOPA sent out a statement stating they agreed with the FAA on this.
It’s been a while but I thought I saw something in the weekly video they produce.
I was shocked when it happened and they jumped on the federal band wagon.
I sent them a nasty gram and of course they never acknowledged it so I did the right thing and canceled my membership.
If Mr Palmer has a AOPA lawyer it was probably from his subscription to AOPA and they have a law coverage plan that you can buy into like an insurance coverage.
I carried this also on my subscription to the Aopa and it was about 50-70 bucks a year as I recall.
As an 81 year old commercial pilot, this whole thing is blowing my mind. When I was taking my flight training years ago, I received many hours of instruction on how to do inspection passes before landing off airport. If even one pilot gets killed landing off airport because he was afraid to do an inspection pass in case he might find his intended landing area unsuitable The government should have their ass sued off. (Good luck with that) Keep up the good work Trent.
If you have to come within 500 feet of people, structures, vehicles or vessels to do an inspection pass, then land somewhere else. Simple.
@@reason6835 that's an absurd comment from an airmchair
@@vibratingstring: I’m a pilot. You aren’t allowed to fly within 500 feet of people, structures, vehicles or vessels except when necessary for TAKEOFF OR LANDING. It does NOT say “except when necessary for an inspection pass.”
If you have to get closer to houses than 500 feet to do an inspection pass, then YOU CANT DO THE INSPECTION PASS. Land somewhere else.
There’s absolutely no reason to jeopardize the safety of people on the ground just so you can land at some unfamiliar location for fun. Go somewhere else to play with your stol plane.
No more go arounds for you skippy.
@@reason6835 Y R a D.
I hope this isn't a problem exclusive to the FAA. I've had a regulator tell me to my face that a rule wasnt in writing, it was unwritten department policy, and I was forced to spend millions unnecessarily because "I'm the regulator and I said so". These agencies are way out of bounds.
I've met good people at the FAA; one even came to my defense when a controller screwed up and blamed me, but it never got to the hearing stage. The real issue isn't individuals, it's the bureaucratic, power-driven culture. Power corrupts; even good people can fall victim to that mentality if they're not aware of it.
As an ex- tower controller (and a private pilot), I have seen a number of controllers exercise their “authority” as “controllers” of aircraft, rather than coordinators of air “traffic”. An aircraft on an extended entry to the downwind was was literally yelled-at to widen his downwind leg because of a possible conflict with another aircraft on a straight-out departure. There was no traffic call to either aircraft as to their relative position , direction and distance from each other. In another incident, this same controller told another aircraft on a circular pattern to “square your base leg”.
Don’t you just love these “tower flowers” who think they’re flight instructors? The next thing you know, some “A” stand gestapo will yell at a nervous student pilot on touchdown for not landing on the runway centerline.😮
Truth!
Read the constitution, Article I, section 8, and the 10th.
Regulate interstate commerce, that is their delegated duty, but to pester people for landing privately, within a state, is definitely unconstitutional, breaking the highest law of the land.
Since I have nothing nice to say… (without stating the obvious) - thank you sharing Trent. Good luck and keep up the good fight.
Two neighbors long time feuding over other issues and Trent gets caught in the middle of it. Normally out where these guys live low flying airplanes, while not common, are no reason to panic. The one guy used this one incident in retribution ... who can throw the bigger rock and civilization hasn't changed since the dawn of time.
Fight the good fight Trent !!! Keep up the good work !!!
Trent we got your back in central California.... we love what you stand for.. you’re an amazing pilot we watch all your videos . Sorry it has to be this way but you’re fighting for all of us good luck.
Best interview on this so far.
What a sad waste of money to go after a non-issue with this event. In the meantime, how many deviations and deaths are happening every week? There is no there there.....
You realize that the money being spent is spurred on by Trent right? And, I just since his deviation didn’t result in death, then no one should look at it right?
It was a simple case. Likely non-pilot neighbor has video of FAR violation and reports it to FAA…Trent takes responsibility (which he does in his own words), case is closed. The only thing to appeal is the result.
@@akstol6468 doesn't seem that he actually made a violation. He made a decision not to land based on his safety concerns. If he would have landed anyway the FFA wouldn't consider it a violation. Stupid🤦
We had a newly constructed tower about 600 feet high, skinny and grey, 2 miles from our public airport, about where some of the larger aircraft turn downwind to base. Being newly constructed, lights were inoperative for a period of time after it was up. It was IMPOSSIBLE to see, literally invisible, even in good lighting, but especially since the lights were INOP for at least two months after it was constructed, and this was before it started showing up on charts. I called the FAA and they were COMPLETELY DISINTERESTED in my "complaint" saying that was a duty for local authorities or FCC, anyone but them!!!. I said what about a pilot alert, NOTAM or something, or anything?? NOPE. NOTHING. I was absolutely taken aback. So I called every operator who flew out of there myself and talked with the chief pilots directly and told them about it. They were all incredibly thankful. So I know FAA doesn't take everything quite this serious as you experienced.
where were you when the proposal and comment period were published?
@@buckmurdock2500 I have no idea, For all I know there wasn't one. I'm not a government official, I'm just a regular dude that saw a problem. One would assume that an unlit tower near an airport would never happen.
@@peterclemmins7099 I myself would assume that such a building would have to have those lights even while under construction.
I went through an investigation recently where someone filed a complaint against me which the FAA found to be a non issue. But I definitely hated how I felt I had to prove my innocence as opposed to innocent until proven guilty. Although no where close to Trent’s issue, I definitely feel a lot of the same feelings about an unconstitutional process.
The FAA is not the police. They have an obligation to find what happened. All they can do is take your pilots license. What Trent did was a classic buzzing stunt with an old excuse of “I was planning on landing but did a go-around.” Every student pilot learns that.
@@oldmech619get off my lawn old man.
@@oldmech619 the issue is to, “all they can do is take your license” is that wood cost me a hundred grand in 6 months. So some young CFI making false claims can have a large impact on a family if for whatever reason their claim was substantiated. So it’s kind of a bigger deal then just not flying for six months.
@@christopherbordenave6955 I agree that loosing ones license for six months can have a significant impact on a pilots life. That is why the FAA is usually lenient unless (1) you make the national news, (2) bend metal, (3) kill a civilian on the ground or (4) you lie to the FAA, or (5) a civilian files a complaint of buzzing. And those reason is why Trevor Jacob did 3 of the 5. His biggest mistake was making the news and lying to the Feds. He may get prison time for what he did after the “crash”. What Trent did was an amateur adolescent stunt of “ intentional” landing attempt then doing a go-around then lied. Life is simple. Buzzing will definitely get you in trouble with the FAA. And all pilots know that so don’t do it. I will say low flying is a lot of fun but birds can cause significant damage and power lines are extremely dangerous. I did it in helicopters.
@@christopherbordenave6955 An airline pilot friend was telling me that he got busted for Buzzing but it was a cop. He went in front of the judge but worked it out that he was cited for excessive noise and payed the fine. He didn’t get the buzzing citation on his FAA record. He got the airline job. A very important note is that he did not Lie about the buzzing.
Reno 2023;. My first trip to Reno was 1975. I had a blast doing stills & video! I have film of Silver T6 #1 and #2 during and after the finish, taken from the hill behind the marker pylon. I did not see the crash as it was across the valley. Sad way to end the weekend, but still a wonderful show.
Trent your experience with the FAA is on the minds of many pilots and airshow photographers.
I've heard from several "old" pilots that you can't win against the FAA. I sure hope that Trent does win and it impacts the "above the law" mentality that some have within our government departments.
The best and most important episode from take off to date!
Not aviation related but here in Northern Ireland myself and neighbours are having to fight City Hall and they are behaving exactly how your FAA and cronies are doing. We aint giving in and I salute you for continuing the good fight. Regards, Jim the Brit in NI UK
Trent is definitely getting railroaded, and I hope that someone, somewhere, gets it right and tosses the case.
Yeah, that's not happening, it's the F-ing government now being lead by the corrupt demoratic party. Everything they touch or do is about money and POWER !
Nothing will change until we war against them and overthrow the terrorists tat are the democratic party !
Assuming he wins in the end, they should at minimum reimburse all of his out of pocket legal costs, and $20K for his "troubles" associated with this treatment.
@@danblumel sure it's only taxpayers on the fucking hook. Be different if it came out of the Democratic Party's Slush Fund for Stealing future Elections !
I agree on the lack of justice for Trent. FAA has taken this interpretation of the rules to a new level!
This is just like a fish and game situation. A friend shot a ram where the requirement is a "full curl." Upon inspection, it was 1/8 of an inch shy of a full curl. He got a lawyer. The lawyer said he had two options... 1) Admit he was wrong and that he learned from this and if it was close he shouldn't have taken the shot. 2) Argue that by any reasonable standard, he made every effort he could and there was no way to see that the ram was off by 1/8". He consulted a friend who had "dealt" with these types of cases before and he said that if he pleaded guilty, demonstrated remorse, and stated that he was willing to accept the consequence of his actions - then he'd have a chance. If he pleaded innocent and argued it, then they would go after him hard. He'd lose his truck, rifle, hunting privileges for life, etc. This sounds like the same deal. They just want people to roll over and accept guilt rather than argue with any common sense. People who plead guilty are rewarded and people who fight are punished. My friend pleaded guilty and the prosecutor said, "Great. Pay the fine and you're done."
Thank you Trent and Dan! I wish Trent the best outcome, I mean he has already been drug through the mud and back again.
If there is no jury there is no real trial. It is a administrative hearing they are treating you as a government employee.
The FAA's "drone" rules are another example of ineptitude and malice. I don't need government interference and regulation when flying a toy plane at the park. It's ridiculous.
Don’t you think there is more at stake than toy planes at a park when it comes to drones? Because I am sure that every drone is just operated for fun at a park that couldn’t possible cause a problem for pilots of real airplanes right? Everyone is just happy to buzz the park and never do anything bad with them.
I’m sure you lack of ineptness and malice would perfectly suit you to coming up with the right way to handle drones right?
@@akstol6468If you're flying a "real" (manned) plane where I fly my RC foamy at the park, you're already going to be breaking tons of FAA regulations (and common sense) and probably going to crash. My flying there does not impact the safe operation of your aircraft.
Someone intent on doing bad things isn't going to follow FAA regulations in the first place. This goes for almost anything.
Yes, those of us who know the hobby well through decades of experience could (and have proposed) far more sensible, reasonable guidelines for operation than anything the FAA or commercial drone industry have to date... by a long shot. The FAA does not understand (or care-to understand it would seem) our hobby.
What the FAA has put on our hobby (RID) solves no safety issues (real or imagined) and is effectively pointless.
Oversight happens because there are morons out there that do fly drones and fuck things up
Good luck Trent! Your gonna need a huge army to get anything changed or created with the FAA! Your gonna need the best of the best $$$$$$attorneys who know everything about FAA!
How does this 500ft rule apply to crop dusters? I have dusters buzzing my house annually (not an issue, I run outside to watch). They could not operate any other way. Do they have an exception?
Well said Trent Palmer. Dan for the questions and seeing the big picture.
As a young pilot myself coming into this world I would like to come in without the court being against me. I see the big picture as a whole. And if I ever come to a case like this I will certainly reach out to others who have faced unfair prosecution to fight a good fight for not only aviation but our rights as a whole.
I once had an amazing career ahead of me tell I landed myself in the sights of the FAA. Now all I have is an airplane that I can’t legally fly and no hopes of realizing my dream. Once you get on their list it’s like they feel that they just have a point to make.
Trent Palmer is a patriot for standing up for his rights. Stopping the administrative state from denying “innocent until proven guilty “ and replacing it with “do it because I say so” is the tyranny we must resist. I started flying in 1976 and consider it my privilege and joy.
The FAA judicial process should be moved outside of the FAA and moved to the Judicial Branch of the federal government.
As it stands, there is no meaningful separation of power and thus no check and balance, which, is at the very heart of our constitution.
This should be true for all departments of the executive branch.
I'm very impressed by Trent's approach here. He's "taking the high road" overwhelmingly and is leaving the space for the FAA to look particularly bad based on their own actions. Dan, you might consider seeking out a non-involved lawyer to do an interview with who can explain administrative law to spell out why "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in a simple way in this realm, for example. Something like that would do your viewers a good service to provide a more full understanding of how the law works in this realm versus the impression that one might get from some of your asides. such an interview would also be an opportunity to cover and explain the specific basis on which Trent is appealing the administrative ruling, which would likely be very interesting to all of us following this situation.
Great idea.
The elevator answer is pilot certificate is a "privilege" therefore in their opinion you have to prove to their satisfaction your innocence.
@LegalEagle comes to mind. He breaks down all kinds of court cases, and I bet he'd be willing to take a crack at this!@@TakingOff
Maybe a @legaleagle colab?
Like most current bureaucracies, the FAA suffers from both Arrogance and Ignorance. Ignorance in the inexperience and lack of knowledge caused by being undereducated and understaffed. Arrogance from the many staff that are experienced and knowledgeable and are being overworked and under supported...so they take it out on the GA community. That's where the "Ipse Dixit" comes from. The reality is it boils down to a lack of professionalism from the so-called professionals.
Thanks Trent for continuing the fight. I have Always held it wrong that the FAA and NTSB process to adjudicate possible violations is UN-CONSTITUTIONAl and should be eliminated. Innocent until PROVEN GUILTY, and beyond a shadow of doubt. And there are a lot of pilots out here that agree with you I sure do.
These are essentially administrative actions, not prosecutions.
Well, sort of. It does not say you have a right to fly in the Constitution. Being a pilot, like being a doctor or a lawyer or an astronaut, is a privilege, not a right, and conduct can be judged by a board of some sort, be it the FAA, a professional board, or NASA. You have to prove to someone that you have competence to be a pilot, lawyer, or astronaut. You’re not born with the right to be those things, and regulating bodies don’t have to prove you wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. The way it works is they pull your privileges, rightly or wrongly, and then you appeal. Yes, some people are wrongly accused and get reinstated after appeal, but it allows the regulating authorities to maintain safety, be it with pilots, lawyers, doctors, or astronauts. Try using the “innocent until proven guilty” line on your boss when he errantly accuses you of screwing up. It just doesn’t apply to everything in our lives.
Don’t get me wrong here, Trent is being wrongly persecuted, but the FAA has every right to regulate pilots. Try flying the way we fly anywhere else in the world. We would all get SAMs up the tailpipe. I wish the appeals were not so torturous. But we do have an appeals process.
The FAA regulates aviation, not just pilots, and has to answer to the millions of people who are non pilots too. These people could, if they united, take our privileges away from us.
Probably better to have taken an unjust licking, not get too noisy, and fly another day. You might not like the process, nor might I, but there is nothing unconstitutional about any of this. Trent gets to go to District Court were, given the facts, he will almost certainly win. When he does, it will teach the FAA a lesson. The constitution doesn’t guarantee inexpensive justice, but it does guarantee justice. Trent will win this one. Count on it.
@@UncleKennysPlacethat’s the fucken excuse that still is unconstitutional
@@glenwoodriverresidentsgrou136the government still has to prove on what ever action it’s enforcing. The FAA just using I told you so and should be stripped of that power.
Great interview, I have been following both of you for a few years now. The FAA and the NTSB are important agencies and their roll in aviation and aviation safety is paramount. I have always thought of them as professional, so I would expect them to treat people with respect and not skew the facts or ignore good sense just to go after a pilot which was actually following the FAA’s own suggested guidelines to begin with. As Trent put it, I am not anti-FAA or NTSB, they are staffed with very qualified professionals. So why then has this occurred over something that quite frankly was VERY PETTY to begin with.
Just my two cents!
Btw, did Trent talk about the second incident 2 weeks later? From the transcript:
“Upon questioning from the law judge, Mr. Pena stated that he and his wife saw the
aircraft flying low again a few weeks later and they wondered whether the flight was “some type
of intimidation tactic or harassment.”29 Mr. Pena and his wife were in their backyard when they
observed the aircraft, which he estimated was 200 to 300 feet from them. While Mr. Pena did not
report the second flight to the FAA, he mentioned it to the FAA Inspector.30 Further, Mr. Pena
clarified that during the November 24th flight, he estimated that the aircraft was 50 feet above his
propane tank at the moment it first came into view and then it dipped a bit lower.31 When Mr.
Pena first heard the aircraft, he stated that he initially thought something was crashing into or
near his house and as a combat veteran, the sound startled him.32 When he initially saw the
aircraft, Mr. Pena stated that his thoughts were, “[d]isbelief, shock, anger that somebody would
do something like that.”33”
First of all, hearsay. Second, who is to say that is Trent Palmer flying in this "incident" being quoted?
@@SilvaAdventures decidedly not hearsay, direct personal testimony of witnessed events taken under oath. I've seen all of Trent’s vids. Never known him to loan out his plane.
In civil proceedings, the standard of evidence is “a preponderance of the evidence,” not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
An eye witness that claims a distance of "50 feet from his propane tank" how did he measure that?
I work with people at night who keep talking about all the drones flying around out here, and its literally Jets landing at DIA over 25+ miles away.
Trent did nothing "wrong" except ADMIT that he was making low passes intentionally.
If he said he was LANDING and that it was NECESSARY to get that close to a structure, then there were be ZERO regulatory problem. Only a neighbor complaint. Which for the sake of improving aviation public relations I would say don't do that.
@@jj4791 read the 146 page NTSB transcript. Both the complainant & his next door neighbor on the far side from where Trent was trying to land were in the backyard where the propane tank is at the time of this incident, talking across the fence. Complainant is an Iraq combat veteran twice deployed as an MK-19 machine gunner, very experienced at estimating ranges.
@@jj4791 btw, not just a neighbor’s complaint, but a violation of his property owner's rights & his expectations of privacy. In fact, NV property owners feel so strongly in this matter that the legislature passed a law specifically dealing with a property owner’s right to control the air space over his property, particularly aircraft and drones. It is understood that FAA regulations supercedes state law in this matter, but the heat is on the FAA to do something in NV.
Good for you Trent. Way to stick up for yourself. Keep it up.
The problem here is that there is no due process when it comes to the FAA. That needs to be changed and put into law. The FAA is out of control.
Not out of control. They have always been in total control. They have been a dictatorial government agency hiding behind a licensing system since day one.
no due process would be "here's your fine" with no chance to appeal it.
Yup. I was grounded for a medical incident from 14 years ago. I jumped through every hoop the FAA required (passed ALL medical tests) and the FAA still said go away for four years. Not sure if I will go back and try again or let it go forever.
@@buckmurdock2500 Guilty until you prove otherwise (and then still ignored) is not due process... it's a kangaroo court.
@@jasonhurdlow6607 correct. The system calls it ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. People need to understand Palmer is now for the first time in this saga, bringing this issue to the first rung of non-kangaroo court, by having the case finally heard in the US COURT of APPEALS, where both the NTSB and FAA stand to have their admin law power trip scrutinized by jurisprudence of much higher threshold and social accountability.
Right in Trent! Fight that good fight!
When can we get an interview of the FAA people that continue to push this case, and hear their rationale? Especially the question on whether this case forces unsafe landings after a low pass?
You do realize the only people pushing the case are Trent and his lawyers right? 91.119 is enough guidance…forcing this to the appeals court could cause for MORE regulation…what can’t people understand that. Trent could end up setting a bad precedent.
Very sorry that Trent has to experience that. I am not a citizen of the USA, but unfortunately made the exact same experience in a very different case when in court in the USA (our dog was stolen by an american citizen; we presented all the proves. written proves and pictures and medical files, to the judge, at the end he rules against us even though the opposing party had no prove to back up their lies, judge just said I don't give any credit to your proves and give all the credit to the thief). Where is the justice??? And even the media was against us, and presented false pictures of another dog. It is important that we stand up against unjustice; each and everyone of us. Sometimes we are brought into situations and i am thankful that Trent shows involvement and fights for our freedom.
Excellent interview Dan. It is such a shame that Trent is going through this. I hope for our sake that he can come out victorious. Keep up the excellent work. Safe skies my friend 🇺🇸🛩️
It’s not about Trent. It’s about us now.
West Virginia v EPA take a gander at what the outcome and how the court ruled on it, you might find it interesting reading
Most people usually believe the system works until they get dragged through it.
Don’t you dare give up Trent. This would be devastating and possibly the end to GA
Is the video available of the inspection pass?
Yes. You tube makes it difficult to post a link, but Flying magazine has embeded the video in an article in their online magazine. If you google "trent palmer video flying magazine" It should be the first return from the search.
Well done interview. Thanks for both Trent and Dan's time and efforts. Another case of Gov't overreach. How about an interview with the FAA? What is their story?
This is unbelievable to hear.
Dan, thank you for doing this interview with Trent. I remember when this event first happened, thinking that, based on my own experience with the FAA, Trent was doomed. I had a similar thing happen with a helicopter that ended my career not only as a pilot but as an A&P/IA, as well. 20,000 hours and 40 some years in aircraft of all types with nothing but memories. Like Trent, I had good friends with not only the FAA, but the NTSB, as well. To a man, they all said that battling with those entities was a losing proposition. Luckily, I'm still able to watch Trent's videos. I hope he keeps going with them. Mike Patey also has some absolutely phenomenal content. Keep it up guys. Dan, again, thank you for all you do.
And visit Mike with his remarkable swimming pool in Spanish fork on the spanish fork river.
You can still fly ultralights,like the Virus, even an EA
(electric airplane) never give up!
Join the EAA, they will appreciate your expertise and even beat Steve Henry in his 44
@@Arturo-lapaz The Zlinaero Shock Ultra is a great ultralight too and a proper bushplane.
@@krichd1 what do you think of the much simpler Blue Yonder Merlin, right here in Canada
(shorter tripp to see one, also a home built)
@@Arturo-lapaz I'm not familiar with that plane, but in general, I prefer the factory built planes like Zlinaero, Eurofox, Pipistrel.
Two points:
1. The FAA got one on the snout about the whole Boeing 737 Max 8 fiasco and they're probably don't want to be kicked in the nuts again.
2. It reminds me of the FAA's handling of the Bob Hoover case which also went the distance.
Wait until Elon Musk sues the FAA, together with the State of Texas, because according to the tenth Amendment all powers not delegated to Congress , enumerated in Article I, section 8, are reserved to the States or the People respectively.
Nowhere in section 8 is any mention of the regulation of space launch ( of course not). The only power is the regulation of INTERSTATE commerce.
SpaceX launch is totally within the State of Texas, not even a commercial launch.
Great overreach of the would be Federal interplanitary Administration.
At least a power to be created by an amendment, the right way to do so.
Trent is nowhere a Bob Hoover
but the FAA's arrogance is mirrored in this case@@ushouldntjudgeme3683
@@ushouldntjudgeme3683 The case is what is being compared, not the people...The fallout from this could have a much larger impact on the aviation community than Hoovers ruling.
Viewers are gaining in insight into how Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority works. Down Under we have had to put up with such draconian aviation surveillance and enforcement for decades. Looks like the FAA has been learning from CASA.
Is there any video from Trent's side to show his perspective of the inspection passes? If not, too bad that he didn't have his cameras running that day.
Now who would video a buzz job.....I mean, "inspection pass"? LOL
You are so right, you should make a FundMe account for us to help you financially in protecting our rights and freedoms. I´ve been there!! long story, but we cannot let them win just because is hard for you to take the full legal bill of the process.
Thanks for fighting the good fight Trent! We appreciate it.
I recently had a run in with the FAA and i am extremely disappointed with the way they handle things and then ignore other things.
When they say to you: "We are here from the FAA and are only here to help." You know they are lying. 🤥
We had a newly constructed tower about 600 feet high, skinny and grey, 2 miles from our public airport, about where some of the larger aircraft turn downwind to base. Being newly constructed, lights were inoperative for a period of time after it was up. It was IMPOSSIBLE to see, literally invisible, even in good lighting, but especially since the lights were INOP for at least two months after it was constructed, and this was before it started showing up on charts. I called the FAA and they were COMPLETELY DISINTERESTED in my "complaint" saying that was a duty for local authorities or FCC, anyone but them!!!. I said what about a pilot alert, NOTAM or something, or anything?? NOPE. NOTHING. I was absolutely taken aback. So I called every operator who flew out of there myself and talked with the chief pilots directly and told them about it. They were all incredibly thankful. So I know FAA doesn't take everything quite this serious as you experienced.
@@peterclemmins7099 a pilot i know of was fired from two flying jobs for showing up drunk and fired from his job at forestry for landing across the taxiway in front of a student pilot, the FAA hired him shortly afterward to be a safety inspector.
I remember when I was training for a ppl and a FFA inspector was at the fbo and everyone was giving him the big eye for cutting locks on hangers to confiscate log books without a warrant and the main cfi had the guys car towed while he was in the hanger.... holy shit the shit storm that hit that place but was fucking hilarious when he walked out looked for his car holding two boxes of logbooks and turned around and had 4x 19 to 20 year old cfis laughing their asses off
That's incredible! Cutting locks? Wow! He should definitely have had a search warrant to do that. Communist!? ...
Funny that Dan keeps talking about Due Process.
This guy is and has always been one of my heroes!! Truly a class act
Keep fighting the good fight, this should be brought to appeals court at minimum.
Ipse Dixit--Latin for "Because I Said So."
US Court of appeals. Sounds like a better place (for fairness) but a more expensive one. A gofundme anywhere?
Trent, none of us used to be anti-government. Their stupidity, greed, incompetence etc has caused sane folk to desdain them. Keep up the fight.
Yep, last few years have proven them to be completely worthless.
Small people with too much power are dangerous for all of us... chasing dandelion seeds in the wind.
Good interview and video of the facts! 91.119 is just a suggestion! LOL
Is there a go fund me site for Trent?
Time to change the name of Freedom Fox.....! I suggest Boston Tea Party, followed by Tar and Feather!!!!
@stevelehto should make a video on this
Administrative Law Judge… is for a civil infraction.
Yes, in a civil case you must prove you are not responsible for damages or a civil fine.
This isn’t criminal… yet.
"I could make uh, I could probably make Mike Patey look like he's you know look like he's flying really dangerously", well after all..... he is a Flying Cowboy
Thank god for the “pilot bill of rights”. It wasn’t that long ago that the FAA/NTSB was the rule maker, judge, and jury with no outside appeal. Now he can at least get a fair trial in an Article 3 Court.
Is there a" go fund me " site to help support Trent's case? I'm not an American but this needs to be fought by all pilots everywhere.
The message that the FAA is sending is that it doesn't matter who's right, anyone that disagrees with ipse dixit or chooses to fight will lose one way or another.
In my flight test, i did a simulated engine out down to (i can't remember exactly) a height less than 500 ft, at the request of the test officer. I guess i did the same thing, theregore illegally. So how do i get a legal test scenario, away from the airport?
Not FFA related, but county law enforcement: I totally understand. My neighbor called the sheriff for flying my drone over his house and I did not come close to his house. Two sheriff deputies in separate trucks came and knocked on my door. I told them the truth. That I did not fly over any houses. A mamajuana grow was 200 yards from my house and I think that the neighbor was supplying water. I'm like what the hell. I will have to admit that I did get a little to close to the grow, which was a squatter situation, and they didn't even own the property. Where is the justice in all of this? Sorry for the rant, but I am clueless on my situation here in Modoc County California.
Keep up the good fight please. I remember reading (I think it was Kitplanes Mag), where someone was called on the carpet because they taxied over to where you wash planes, but did not have their pilot license on them. The ridiculousness of carrying your pilot license for an activity that did not require you to have one was highlighted in the article. In the end, it was clear that the actions of an overzealous, low level FAA agent was the real issue. There needs to be a review meninism for bad agents in all agencies and the public who are governed by these agencies need to be involved. We are seeing more of these citizens oversight boards with Police, it is time for this in the FAA, NTSB, CIA, FBI and a lot of other letter agencies.
I was gonna install ADS-B this year, but after watching Trent’s FAA shakedown, I have canned that idea. ADSB records everything you do, every mistake, every overspeed and more. If they are going to become shakedown artists like the FBI, DOJ, and IRS, no ADSB for m. I rarely have an occasion where I need to fly thru controlled airspace, and the few times I have the let me go thru with my transponder.
At first I was opposed to ADSB, but I gotta say, ADSB out and in are the best, and safest thing in my 23 year aviation career..
I do like my ADSB in…out is a little to invasive after what I have seen so far
@@postulatingspin4470 yeah but for ADSB IN to be effective, we all need to participate in OUT!
I agree with you. I'm tired of the surveillance state we have become.
When this finally gets thrown out I hope a counter suit is in order
Found myself involved in the legal business for over 15 years (couldn’t get out fast enough) there are many [power words] and , simply, the word, “because“ is oddly enough one of them.
I’d love to see eight Cubs and Kitfoxes land at that airstrip. Maybe spend an entire weekend just flying and frolicking… one with a “hello Karen” banner. Though quite “7th grader”, very well deserved. I can’t understand how grown-ups can’t have grown up conversations with other grown-ups. We all have our life dashboard in front of us, full of gauges. One of them is the ego gauge. We all have it. For some of us that needle on the high side way too much.”Karen” should have apologetically backed off a long time ago.
And people say that the government is not being weaponized. It happens in every agency. What do you think about IRS agents being armed?
Never, ever get crossways with a bureaucracy if you can avoid it.
Good morning from Minnesota! What a buch of crap. Thanks for fighting Trent!!
This case sets so many dangerous precedents.
Welcome to the bureaucratic state people. There is no such thing as due process. The inmates are running the asylum! Please keep in mind all the federal agencies that employ their own “enforcement” personnel also act as judge, jury, and executioner! You have no legal rights until you exhaust administrative appeals and have a real judge grant you a day in court based on the “arbitrary and capricious” actions of a bureaucrat. Please keep these facts in mind before you pass judgment on Trent’s actions, these cases matter and must be made example of in order to try to shed light on the actions of ALL federal agency administrative actions!
I wonder if this is the same court the Race Day Quads lawsuit went to, attempting to repeal RemoteID...?
They did that to make an example out of him. It is a shame. I am not a big fan of a lot of RUclipsrs because I am not a fan of this new society. But Trent has never turned me away with his pride and ego BS that so many RUclipsrs have. That is what should be made an example of. Not him looking for a landing spot.
You write down what you did, and that document becomes evidence. If there is a witness, have them write down their account, that becomes evidence.
The federal government relies on the ALJ/administrative process to circumvent the constitution. The SEC, FTC ,and even the FAA have taken loses on this front recently. Supreme Court has begun to take these cases and basically said you have a right to trial by jury and can skip the administrative process. The government attorneys hate this because they need bought and paid for judges to get what they want. Remember the ALJs are appointed and paid for by the agency and not actual federal judges by legal standards. You can opt out of the ALJ process.
Keep fighting. Maybe a go-fund-me would help with the costs. Good luck
I hope AOPA is helping you intros fight!!!!!!!
FYI Trent, I realized what you now know 50 years ago. In that time nothing has changed with "because they say so" since.
The FAA at times tends to side against the pilot when there’s a question of good orderly safe aircraft handling and questionable deviation of FAA regulations …
Dan, let Trent speak
Yeah, I told Bryan Turner when I edited this that I interrupted way too much. Couldnt cut it out or I would have.
When they decide they're coming for you, the size of your stock pile won't matter. The only thing that will protect you is the size of your checkbook.
Wow. I'm not an anti-regulation person by any means, quite the opposite. But this is just mind blowing. In South Africa I can't even imagine our CAA pulling something like this.
Many years ago I was in the Long Beach FAA office for some paperwork with the little airline that I worked for. While I was waiting at the counter, this "inspector" walks in and proudly announced "I had a great day today, I shut down six operations" and he was applauded! I assume this was the same guy who wrote up our Navajo Chieftain with the Q tip props as being un-airworthy and then proceeded to our 172 (that I used to move crews around) and wrote that up also as being un-airworthy. Why? The engine was out being overhauled! There was another outfit that I worked for and I was in the right seat of another Navajo and we had ONE box on board. We were ramped by the FAA at Lindberg in San Diego. They just had a checklist and claimed: over gross weight, inoperable artificial horizons, no nav lights, emergency exit blocked, un approved cargo hold downs... I showed them the paperwork we got from the Long Beach FAA office that they were approved. One guy says, "We don't care what they approve, we don't approve it"! He looks at my first class medical and claimed it was expired, even though as a first class it degrades to a 2nd and then 3rd. I was right seat and not even a required crewmember. We had just flown hard IFR from Long Beach and I told them the artificial horizons ran on engine vacuum and would tumble when we shut down. We had ONE Long skinny box that didn't weigh 50 lbs in a plane that could carry 8pax and luggage. There was NOTHING wrong with the plane and the whole thing went to an ALJ. The PIC took a 6 month suspension out of court so as not to have a revocation. I hadn't done anything and in court, they both admitted it was their 1st day on the job and that neither of them had any aviation experience at all. They had been given a list of things to write people up for and that was exactly what they did. One was an unemployed plumber and the other was also an unemployed tradesman of some kind. Unfortunately for the PIC, he took the 6 month suspension out of court before he knew the complete lack of credibility of the inspectors. This was the early 80's and the FAA sure seemed out to "get" as many of us as possible. I don't know why his plea couldn't be reversed but I was only 22.
This is the government that I know about.. Gross incompetence, ineptitude and corruption .....
Just try getting a building permit. It's what the person you talk to says it is, until he goes on vacation. Then after you do it the way he says the person filling in tells you something completely different! This is were the disconnect comes in. And people turn against their government.
Trent needs a jury trial. I wouldnt trust he gets a fair trial if its only decided by people who work in government. You can have explicit language such as Article I Section 10 of the US Constitution that says "no state shall impair the obligation of a contract" yet the Supreme court has ruled it is ok to do if it is beneficial or for emergency purposes yet the Constitution makes no exceptions. This is exactly what happened with landlords and eviction moratoriums. And when I tried to fight back in small claims court the judge didnt even let me present my case and basically argued on the city i was suing's behalf. Thought judges were supposed to be fair and impartial.
Crowd funding required for lawyers.
The Government, any agency of the Government is not there to help you. Especially the administrative bureau of the agency.
Unbelievable that they have nothing better to do…!!!