Re: License To Taxi?

Greg Farris <nonum@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>bretldwig@xxxxxxxxx says...
>>Robert M. Gary wrote:

>>> Insurance sets the requirements. The FAA doesn't care.

>> The FAA only gets involved if there is "intent to fly". If you have a
>>license and you have a wreck on the ramp or a taxiway, you can have a
>>license action if they can show you were intending to fly. At
>>uncontrolled fields therefore you order everyone out and claim it was
>>not your intent to fly...

>Not so sure - there was that account widely published in the aviation
>press about a guy who had his certificate pulled for operating under the
>influence - he only wanted to taxi the aircraft to the hangar (after
>dinner and a few somethings) and drove it off the taxiway. Unless I'm
>recalling it poorly, the FAA wasn't interested in his "no intent to fly"
>argument, even though the fact was clearly established.

The key difference is whether it's "intent to fly" (pilot license required)
or "careless or reckless" operation (license irrelevent).

Look at FAR 91.13(b):

*Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation*

No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of
air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by
aircraft for aircommerce (including areas used by those aircraft
for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or
reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

So as noted upthread, the FAA doesn't require a license to taxi an
aircraft with an unambiguous lack of intent to become airborne,
but if you *do* taxi it, don't do so in a careless or reckless manner.

Note that the definition of "operate" in FAR 1 normally is restricted
to aircraft use "for the purpose of air navigation," but the definition
has an explicit exception for the use of the word in FAR 91.13 .

Joe Morris
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: license woes
    ... Amazingly, I was able to find Simon Wheaton-Smith, one of FAA officers ... unrestricted license, with no glider rating. ... have a Japanese unrestricted with a glider rating. ... maintaining a standard, and so on. ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... of the license, not the intent of the recipient. ... (while in contract ... the kernel (by receiving a Tivo for example and downloading its kernel ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... The "pure license" argument was born largely for silly reasons: ... a license and a contract are judged to be legally ... whether it is a license or a contract really doesn't matter. ... not the intent of the recipient. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: AIRLINE LAUGHS
    ... maintenance license) takes about 2 years of technical training to become training certified and then must pass a tough civil examination before he/she is granted an A&E license and can sign-off work done to an aircraft. ... To fly a particular type aircraft requires training and flight time. ... Airframe and engine companies may send factory qualified and trained mechanics, who may not be licensed A&E personnel, into the field to repair aircraft. ... You may have the legal profession confused with the aerospace profession. ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... of that source on any specific hardware. ... You're again confusing legal terms with the intent. ... And the preamble, not being part of the active portion of the license, has ... required to provide the source code that was used to generate the binary. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)