This was forewarded to me. I can't find a link/URL.
----- Original Message -----
Subject: How NOT to keep your pilot's license!!
Proving, once again, how do you protect against stupid? In retrospect, this is one lucky individual!
Those F16 jocks are there for serious business!!
May 20, 2005
>
> HAND DELIVERY AND CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
>
> Hayden Lowery Sheaffer
> 1209 Orchard Road
> Lititz, Pennsylvania 17543-9702
>
> Re: Case No. 2005EA27004Davean3
>
> EMERGENCY ORDER OF REVOCATION
>
> Under 49 U.S.C. § 46105(c), the Administrator has determined that an
> emergency exists related to safety in air commerce and that immediate
> action to revoke your Private Pilot Certificate No. 1973530 with airplane
> single engine land ratings is required. The reasons for this
> determination are set forth in the paragraph below entitled
> "Determination of Emergency."
>
> Based on an investigation and all evidence presently before the
> Administrator, the Administrator finds that:
>
> 1. You are the holder of Private Pilot Certificate No. 1973530
> issued under part 61 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
>
> 2. On or about May 11, 2005, you acted as pilot in command of civil
> aircraft N5826G, a Cessna 150 aircraft, on a passenger-carrying visual
> flight rules flight, originating from Smoketown, Pennsylvania ("the
> flight").
>
> 3. You acted as pilot in command of the flight when you had not made
> at least three takeoffs and three landings within the preceding 90 days.
>
> 4. Before the flight, you planned a route of flight through the
> Washington DC Metropolitan Area Air Defense Identification Zone ("DC
> ADIZ").
>
> 5. You used February 17, 2005, edition of the Washington sectional
> aeronautical chart ("the chart") for your flight planning.
>
> 6. The chart depicts the DC ADIZ, including the Flight Restricted
> Zone (FRZ), Prohibited Areas P-40 and P-56, and the Washington Tri-Area
> Class B Airspace.
>
> 7. The description of the DC ADIZ on the chart states that the
> airspace comprising the DC ADIZ is from the surface to, but not
> including, Flight Level 180.
>
> 8. Civil aircraft N5826G is an aircraft with dual controls.
>
> 9. During the flight, you permitted the passenger to manipulate
> the controls.
>
> 10. The passenger was a student pilot who, at the time of the
> flight, only had approximately 30 hours of flight time and was not
> endorsed for solo cross-country flight.
>
> 11. During the flight, you as pilot in command retained sole
> responsibility for the safe operation of the aircraft.
>
> 12. During the flight, you failed to exercise the navigation and
> communications skills needed to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft
> and appropriate to the holder of a private pilot certificate.
>
> 13. Before the flight, you failed to take proper preflight action,
> in that you failed to become familiar with all available information
> concerning that flight, including the Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) that
> were in effect for your intended route of flight.
>
> 14. Before the flight, you failed to obtain an enroute weather
> briefing.
>
> 15. You planned to use the VHF Omnidirectional Range navigation
> system ("the VOR") to navigate civil aircraft N5826G during the flight.
>
> 16. The navigation plan you prepared for the flight was incorrect
> for using the VOR to navigate civil aircraft N5826G on the intended
> flight path.
>
> 17. Shortly after departing Smoketown, you became lost.
>
> 18. At no time after you became lost did you contact air traffic
> control or a flight service station to obtain assistance to establish
> your location.
>
> 19. You operated civil aircraft N5826G into the Washington Tri-Area
> Class B airspace in and around the vicinity of Baltimore-Washington
> International Airport.
>
> 20. You operated within the Class B airspace area when you had not
> received an air traffic control clearance for operation within that area.
>
> 21. Before you operated civil aircraft N5826G within the Class B
> airspace in and around the vicinity of BWI Airport, you failed to
> establish two-way radio communication with the air traffic facility
> providing air traffic services to that area, and as a result, you failed
> to maintain two-way radio communication with the air traffic facility
> while operating within the Class B airspace.
>
> 22. You operated civil aircraft N5826G into the DC ADIZ.
>
> 23. At all times mentioned in this document, FDC NOTAM 3/2126
> ("the NOTAM") was in effect and placed restrictions on aircraft
> operations within the DC ADIZ.
>
> 24. The NOTAM prohibited operations of aircraft within the area
> described in the NOTAM, except in accordance with the operating
> requirements and procedures specified in the NOTAM.
>
> 25. Before the flight, you failed to become familiar with the
> flight restrictions contained in the NOTAM pertaining to the DC ADIZ.
>
> 26. You operated civil aircraft N5826G within the areas described
> in the NOTAM for the DC ADIZ and did not comply with the operating
> requirements and procedures for that area.
>
> 27. A U.S. Customs Service Blackhawk helicopter and a Citation
> aircraft were launched and intercepted the aircraft you were operating.
>
> 28. When you were intercepted as described in paragraph 27, you
> were still unaware of your location and believed you were in the vicinity
> of Prohibited Area P-40, located approximately 35-40 nautical miles from
> your actual location.
>
> 29. Even after the interception as described in paragraph 27, you
> continued to allow the passenger to manipulate the controls of the
> aircraft and continued to operate civil aircraft N5826G farther into the
> DC ADIZ and entered the Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ).
>
> 30. At all times mentioned in this document, the NOTAM was in
> effect and placed restrictions on aircraft operations within the FRZ.
>
> 31. The NOTAM prohibited operations of aircraft within the FRZ, as
> described in the NOTAM, except in accordance with the operating
> requirements and procedures specified in the NOTAM.
>
> 32. Before the flight, you failed to become familiar with the
> flight restrictions and procedures contained in the NOTAM pertaining to
> the FRZ.
>
> 33. You operated civil aircraft N5826G within the FRZ and did not
> comply with the operating requirements and procedures for that operation.
>
> 34. As you were operating civil aircraft N5826G in the FRZ, you
> were intercepted by F-16 military aircraft.
>
> 35. The F-16 military aircraft fired flares in the vicinity of
> civil aircraft N5826G.
>
> 36. You did not know how to respond to the military aircraft that
> intercepted your aircraft.
>
> 37. Even after the F-16 aircraft fired flares, you continued to
> operate civil aircraft N5826G in the FRZ.
>
> 38. After the F-16 aircraft fired flares, civil aircraft N5826G
> turned to the west and you operated in a westerly direction toward
> Prohibited Area P-56B.
>
> 39. Certain areas in the District of Columbia are designated as
> prohibited areas with respect to the operation of aircraft therein.
> These areas are captioned "P-56 District of Columbia" and the boundaries
> described in detail in section 73.87 of the Federal Aviation Regulations,
> 14 C.F.R. § 73.87. Prohibited Area P-56 is described as comprising two
> distinct areas--P-56A and P-56B, each including the altitude between the
> surface and 18,000 feet MSL (mean sea level):
>
> (a) P-56A comprises the larger and southernmost of the two, (it
> includes the Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument, White House, and U.S.
> Capitol Building, among other landmarks).
>
> (b) P-56B is located northwest of P-56A, and includes the U.S. Naval
> Observatory.
>
> 40. On May 11, 2005, the United States Secret Service was the
> using and controlling agency for Prohibited Area P-56.
>
> 41. You operated civil aircraft N5826G into Prohibited Area P-56B.
>
> 42. At no time prior to or during your operation of civil aircraft
> N5826G, as described above, did you obtain permission from the United
> States Secret Service to enter Prohibited Area P-56B.
>
> 43. As a consequence of the facts and circumstances set forth in
> paragraphs 39-42, you operated civil aircraft N5826G within Prohibited
> Area P-56B when you did not have permission of the using or controlling
> agency to do so.
>
> 44. Notwithstanding the facts and circumstances set forth in
> paragraphs 2-43, you did not take over the physical manipulation of the
> controls from your passenger.
>
> 45. Based on the facts and circumstances set forth in paragraphs
> 2-44, you operated civil aircraft N5826G in a careless or reckless manner
> so as to endanger the life or property of another.
>
> 46. Your conduct in planning for and operating the flight as set
> forth in paragraphs 2-45 demonstrate that you lack the care, judgment,
> responsibility, and aeronautical skills required of the holder of a
> private pilot certificate.
>
> By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, you violated the
> following Federal Aviation Regulations:
>
> (a) Section 61.57(a) in that you acted as pilot in command of an
> aircraft carrying a passenger when you had not made at least three and
> three landings within the preceding 90 days.
>
> (b) Section 91.103, in that you, as each pilot in command shall,
> before beginning a flight, failed to familiarize yourself with all
> available information concerning that flight.
>
> (c) Section 91.13(a), in that you operated an aircraft in a careless
> or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
>
> (d) Section 91.131(a)(1), in that you operated an aircraft within a
> Class B airspace area when you:
> (1) did not receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having
> jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area; and
>
> (2) did not establish and maintain two-way radio communication with
> the ATC facility providing air traffic services prior to entering that
> airspace.
>
> (e) Sections 73.83 and 91.133(a), in that you operated an aircraft
> within a prohibited area when you did not have the permission of the
> using or controlling agency, as appropriate.
>
> (f) Section 91.139(c), in that when a NOTAM had been issued under
> this section, you operated an aircraft, or other device governed by the
> regulation concerned, within the designated airspace when you did not
> comply with the authorizations, terms, and conditions prescribed in the
> regulation covered by the NOTAM.
>
> (g) Section 99.7, in that you operated an aircraft in an ADIZ or
> Defense Area when, in addition to the applicable rules of this part, you
> did not comply with special security instructions issued by the
> Administrator in the interest of national security and that are
> consistent with appropriate agreements between the FAA and the Department
> of Defense.
>
> As a result of the foregoing, the Administrator finds that you lack the
> qualifications, including the care, judgment, responsibility, and
> aeronautical skills required to hold any pilot certificate, including
> Private Pilot Certificate No. 1973530,. She therefore has determined
> that safety in air commerce or air transportation and the public interest
> require the revocation of the above-mentioned certificate. The
> Administrator further finds that an emergency requiring immediate action
> exists with respect to safety in air commerce or air transportation.
> Accordingly, this Order is effective immediately.
>
> IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to the authority vested in the
> Administrator by 49 USC §§ 44709 and 46105(c), that:
>
> (1) Effective immediately, any airman pilot certificate held by you,
> including your Private Pilot Certificate No. 1973530 is revoked;
>
> (2) You must immediately surrender Private Pilot Certificate No.
> 1973530 to an FAA representative; and
>
> (3) No application for a new private pilot certificate shall be
> accepted from you, nor shall any such certificate be issued to you for a
> period of one year from the date of service of this Order.
>
>
> DETERMINATION OF EMERGENCY
>
> Under 49 U.S.C. §46105(c) the Administrator has determined that an
> emergency exists related to safety in air commerce. This determination is
> based on your lack of qualification to hold a Private Pilot Certificate
> because of the nature and seriousness of the violations set forth in this
> order.
>
> Your failure to properly prepare for your intended route of flight,
> including plotting a course through the DC ADIZ on a current chart that
> depicted the restricted airspace, demonstrates that you lack the
> fundamental technical skills required of a pilot. Your further failure to
> perform proper preflight action, and properly navigate and establish
> necessary communications for the operation of civil aircraft N5826G in
> and around the vicinity of Washington, DC on May 11, 2005, severely
> compromised safety and the security of the Washington, DC area. You lost
> situational awareness throughout the flight, and as a result, operated
> within restricted and prohibited airspace without complying with the
> necessary requirements and authorization to do so.
>
> Even after you operated into the ADIZ and were intercepted by a U.S.
> Customs Blackhawk helicopter, you continued further into the ADIZ and
> penetrated the FRZ and P-56B without any authorization to do so. This
> resulted in your operating civil aircraft N5826G within close proximity
> to the White House, and U.S. Capitol, and Vice President's residence. It
> was only after you were intercepted by F-16 aircraft, which fired flares,
> that you stopped your course of flight and were escorted to a landing in
> Frederick, Maryland. At no time during any of these events did you
> exercise the judgment to take physical control or command of the aircraft
> from your inexpericied passenger.
>
> Your operation of civil aircraft N5826G under these circumstances
> demonstrates either a complete disregard or lack of understanding of
> basic requirements for the safe operation of aircraft. These failures
> establish that you lack the qualifications necessary to hold an airman
> certificate.
>
> The Administrator therefore finds that your actions reflect an emergency
> related to safety in air commerce. This determination reflects the
> Administrator's judgment that a pilot, who has shown himself to be either
> unwilling or unable to comply with regulatory requirements involving
> safety of flight, as described above, constitutes an unacceptable risk to
> safety in air commerce. Accordingly, the Administrator has determined,
> in protection of the public, that safety in air commerce and the public
> interest require the immediate revocation of your Private Pilot
> Certificate No. 1973530 on an emergency basis.
>
> In conclusion, the Administrator has determined that under the criteria
> of FAA Order 2150.3A, paragraph 206.c. (pages 25-26 of Chapter 2) your
> conduct as alleged in this order demonstrates that you presently lack the
> degree of care, judgment, and responsibility required of a certificate
> holder. The Administrator therefore finds in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
> §46105(c) and the guidance found in FAA Order 2150.3A paragraphs 206.d.
> (pages 26-27 of Chapter 2) and 1202.h. (pages 144-145 of Chapter 12) that
> the exercise of the privileges of your certificate while any proceedings
> related to the issuance of this Order are pending is contrary to the
> interest of safety in air commerce. You may appeal from this Order in
> accordance with the appeal procedures set forth below.
>
>
>
>
> Peter J. Lynch
> Assistant Chief Counsel for Enforcement
How NOT to keep your pilot's licence!!
Moderator: Latest news team
-
realplaneshaveprops
- Posts: 698
- Joined: 21 Apr 2005, 00:00
individual.These two guys were not only stupid - they also put hundreds, if not more, individuals lives at risk from the building evacuees panic to the likely casualties from falling Cessna debris over a highly populated area. Less important, but still an issue, is the cost to the U.S. taxpayer in wasted money, time and effort. Having his ticket pulled should be combined with some jail time...
-
TCAS_climb
- Posts: 413
- Joined: 04 Jan 2004, 00:00
Chop his head off while you're at it! 
There's more than meets the eye:
"The much-castigated Pennsylvania pilot who violated the Washington, D.C., ADIZ on May 11 and caused panic in the Capital has been cut a break by the FAA. Hayden "Jim" Sheaffer will be allowed to reapply for his pilot's certificate in 10 months, instead of the one-year restriction that was originally imposed, on the condition that he drop his appeal to the NTSB. In addition, "They asked me not to go out, in essence, and badmouth them," Sheaffer told LancasterOnline. Sheaffer, through his attorney, has said that he had tried repeatedly to make radio contact with authorities that day, but was unsuccessful, contrary to the FAA's initial report. Sheaffer will have to re-take his knowledge and practical tests in order to get his certificate back. The FAA took no action against student pilot Troy Martin, who was at the controls at times during the flight, since he was never pilot in command. "I think it's a fair settlement," Sheaffer's lawyer, Mark McDermott, told The Washington Post. "My client is interested in promoting safety, so he has elected not to fight it and go through retraining. He'll get back to flying as soon as possible."
Taken from AvWeb: http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/a ... tml#190001
The fact that he does not even appeal to the NTSB means -at least to me- that he may not be the lunatic you seem to see in him. He probably made a few good points in his meetings with the FAA attorneys, which does not seem to be the case of the other and much older "intruder" who did not even fight to get his PPL back.
Sheaffer's career in the US aerospace industry is probably over anyway. He will pay the price of his mistakes and that's already enough.
There's more than meets the eye:
"The much-castigated Pennsylvania pilot who violated the Washington, D.C., ADIZ on May 11 and caused panic in the Capital has been cut a break by the FAA. Hayden "Jim" Sheaffer will be allowed to reapply for his pilot's certificate in 10 months, instead of the one-year restriction that was originally imposed, on the condition that he drop his appeal to the NTSB. In addition, "They asked me not to go out, in essence, and badmouth them," Sheaffer told LancasterOnline. Sheaffer, through his attorney, has said that he had tried repeatedly to make radio contact with authorities that day, but was unsuccessful, contrary to the FAA's initial report. Sheaffer will have to re-take his knowledge and practical tests in order to get his certificate back. The FAA took no action against student pilot Troy Martin, who was at the controls at times during the flight, since he was never pilot in command. "I think it's a fair settlement," Sheaffer's lawyer, Mark McDermott, told The Washington Post. "My client is interested in promoting safety, so he has elected not to fight it and go through retraining. He'll get back to flying as soon as possible."
Taken from AvWeb: http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/a ... tml#190001
The fact that he does not even appeal to the NTSB means -at least to me- that he may not be the lunatic you seem to see in him. He probably made a few good points in his meetings with the FAA attorneys, which does not seem to be the case of the other and much older "intruder" who did not even fight to get his PPL back.
Sheaffer's career in the US aerospace industry is probably over anyway. He will pay the price of his mistakes and that's already enough.
Lunacy can be accounted for - irresponsibility calls for attribution and retribution, and good points, those are what a good attorney is paid for! These fellows missed the clues from a Citation & a Blackhawk AND THEN the F-16 fast movers! CFI to student: "Hey look, flares and jets and things! Whaddaya think...?"