Busted and revoked pilot license from inoperative ADS-B technology

Learn how inoperative ADS-B technology in a small aircraft resulted in a pilot permanently losing her license as punishment from the FAA. The full details can be found in the story published on AVweb here: www.avweb.com/aviation-news/b...
This video summarizes the severe problems a pilot can face if their ADS-B equipment is turned off or not functioning (as can be discovered by the FAA). Also, find out how easy it is for YOU to use a free AP on your smartphone to track flight records created by anyone's ADS-B-equipped plane. Understanding these principles can keep you out of big trouble!
Details on use of ADS-B from the FAA:
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...
Prior Video Tip on intro to ADS-B rules: • The new ADS-B law for ...
One error in the video: (pointed out by a viewer) the smartphone apps that allow you to view flight data do not access the FAA's database or receivers - instead, they rely on a myriad of public receivers around the country to directly access the ADS-B signals and share the data.
Archive of previous videoTips: www.homebuilthelp.com/Tip_of_...

[@r4raced4doom2]

She took "you can do anything you want on your last day" to heart. What a legend.

[@songmaster9308]

Why did you feel the need to speculate/infer she may have cut it off without even telling the full story of her side? At least your link to the AVweb site tells her side of it, and she states that the FAA evidence even shows her ADS-B cutting out at other points in her flights and the findings of the technician who inspected it. You cast doubt on her unfairly, without giving those important details. The burden of "proof" that she didn't turn her ADS-B off should not be on her, it should be on the FAA to prove that she did!

[@darwinawardcommittee]

I guess that’s the risk you run when you get caught doing something stupid and illegal. You lose any benefit of the doubt.

[@billclisham8668]

The burden of proof was met when there was photographic evidence of her flying below the bridge. It's an easy and reasonable connection to make that she wouldn't want to be caught doing it so of course she turned it off.

[@peterbrookman869]

Ads-B can drop out from ground repeaters if at low altitude or hidden by hills etc. not conclusive 😕

[@davisrs1]

Or bridge steel!

[@tomthebomb9474]

It’s not as low as you think, I went and tracked my first cross country and I lost signal at 3000 feet msl 2200 agl, it’s crazy.

[@homomorphic]

Yeah, exactly.

[@redjohn20001]

Shouldn't it be down to the FAA to prove the system was turned off, rather than for the pilot to prove they didn't turn if off. They could acuse you of any thing that might be impossible to defend. FAA - judge, jury and executioner!

[@danielkeirsteadsr6939]

Poor old gal, she accidently let loose the teenager within her. When it happens to me i say to myself " knock it off in there" I'm running this show. But he still gets loose once in a while.

[@dereklacy]

Hazardous attitudes can and do affect everyone. It's up to the pilot to use the jelly-ware to combat it.

[@Ed-hz2um]

I well recall the controversy years ago when the FAA proposed installing cockpit voice recorders in airliners. ALPA successfully argued that such devices could only be used for accident investigation...not for certificate action. Too bad the flying community didn't make the same argument for ADS-B.

[@tomedgar4375]

I recently transported a medical pastiest from Lake Havasu City to Phoenix at lower levels to assist him in his breathing. Stayed below 3500ft except for a few spots to 4000 to cross mountain passes. I was surprised to see that Flight aware captured the entire flight, even in places when I was in valleys with mountain tops clearly above me.

[@Milkmans_Son]

FA has access to space-based data via Aireon satellites as well.

[@warsurplus]

@@Milkmans_Son There are also thousands of FightTracker volunteers with ground based ADS-B receivers that voluntarily provide the data via the internet to FlightTracker and the FAA.

[@cybair9341]

Big brother is watching us all. :-(

[@100SteveB]

I find it interesting that general aviation pilots have the choice whether to fit ADS-B or not. Yet here am, a mere model aircraft pilot, soon to be in a position where it will be unlawful for me to fly a small foam plane, weighing less than 1kg, without something similar to ADS-B fitted to it. Remote ID they call it. I certainly wish us hobby model pilots had the choice!

[@carlmccall7198]

To many idiots flying drones in busy airspace.... is what it is..

[@429thunderjet2]

Well if you don't have it you gotta be careful what airspace you're in. With full size aircraft that is, not models.

[@crawford323]

This reminds me of the cargo pilot who mooned someone during a push-back. He lost his ticket. Does the penalty exceed the crime. I believe it does.

[@marklandry2509]

She could have made a very good argument that when she dropped below a certain elevation her transponder was no longer picked up. I’ve seen on several accident reports that as an airplane is going down (usually in hilly terrain) the signal is lost quite a distance from the actual wreckage.

[@Jack-ne8vm]

Idea is for other pilots to see & avoid you electronically.. You don't hear about all the times someone has changed course to miss an electronic blip. Safety is a 'non-event'.

[@jimhayes2786]

ADS-B Saved my life when a Cirrus tried to plow into my wife and me (we were also all talking to ATC so it was a big FUBAR). Head to head situation, our closure rate was over 300kts, got a 12 oclock same level warning less than 1 mile. I immediately took evasive and saw it fly right through where I would have been 5 seconds prior. I will never fly without it. This is just one of many situations where it personally reduced risk/avoided an accident. I like Martha, met her and have a number of friends/family who have flown with her, but she deserved to lose her license over this one.

[@georgehaeh4856]

The FAA lawyers are totally ignorant of the basic physics of terrain shielding. Descending into the gorge spanned by the bridge, the terrain got between the ATC radar and the transponder antenna. If the transponder does not receive an interrogation, it won't reply.

[@johngumshoe762]

FYI : Apps like FlightAware, Flightradar24, and ADS-B Exchange rely on public ADS-B receivers to receive and share aircraft ADS-B data. These apps do not have access to the FAA's ADS-B receivers and data. If you don't want your info to show up on these apps, just put your ADS-B transmitter in anonymous mode, the FAA will still be able to see you and know who you are, but the general public will not using any of these ADS-B apps. Trent Palmer for example runs his ADS-B in anonymous mode for obvious reasons. I'd hope the FAA confirmed their ADS-B receivers had coverage where Martha's ADS-B data cut out before they went and revoked her license. Also, I've seen on many ADS-B transmitter installations, they share the same circuit breaker as the transponder, so if her plane also wasn't responding to radar pings, it's not looking so good for Martha. If Martha really did have an ADS-B failure, she should fight to get her license back.

[@HomebuiltHELP]

Thank you for that great information John!

[@muhammadsteinberg]

Exactly!!!...I've used FlightAware to view my track if Garmin pilot fails to log like it sometimes does.

[@culpeppersautomotive]

What if it actually lost signal while down in river valley near bridge?

[@peterbrookman869]

Most likely , I can find many occurrences of my ADS-B dropping out at low altitude or hidden from a ground station repeater will drop out, ie in the hills etc.

[@1STGeneral]

Device doesn't have a log of when it's powered on ?

[@TomHail]

@@1STGeneral nope. Well, maybe, mine doesn’t. Not required.

[@rogerlarson8040]

@@peterbrookman869 Exactly.

[@Airplane_Willy]

Just playing devil’s advocate. That’s what the FAA is saying. Prove that it was a mechanical malfunction in the unit, otherwise we’re going to assume you were too low to have reception. I’m not saying she wasn’t low enough to lose reception, but she was kind of hosed in this instance where there were cameras that caught her flying low in that area and ADS-B couldn’t prove she wasn’t. Were they making an example of her? Quite possibly. Just don’t put yourself in that position or otherwise have a really good mechanic that can write a well worded letter in your defense.

[@texastyrannyresponseteam794]

you can request for your ADS-B data to be blocked from those apps.. the FAA records are still there, just hidden from casual observers.. alot of you tube pilots do this to avoid being tracked real time,.. alot of corporate and charter aircraft are blocked as well..

[@andrewalexander9492]

That doesn't really work. That only is effective for ads-b data that the FAA collects and disseminates. That's a very small part of the data out there. Most of the data you see on the flight tracking websites is collected by private third party hobbyists running their own ads-b tracking station (my neighbor does this) and forwarding their data to the flight tracking websites. (my neighbor forwards his data to 4 different flight tracking websites as well as ATC audio to LiveATC.com) The private third party trackers and the flight tracking websites are under no obligation to withhold N-Numbers.

[@scottalperin8385]

She was dumb. She knew the law and broke it. People like that should be accountable for their stupidity

[@JDean004]

The question remains, if the bridge camera hadn’t captured her and then reported her flight to the FAA would they have investigated or even known about it? Are the records kept in case of accidents/incidents so then can investigate what happened….

[@TIO540S1]

I respect her and her career but, I gotta say, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[@lairdbufflehead]

Has anyone checked to see if the ADS-B transmission was simply blocked by terrain and the bridge itself due to the low level of the flight. If the pilot had flown under the bridge as part of an approach to land and then landed the plane on a sand bar I think it would have been 100% legal. Just as "water skiing" with a plane is considered dangerous except when used as part of the landing sequence.

[@johnelliott4521]

She violated regulation, merited a suspension, not revocation.

[@dr_jaymz]

at 78 its the same I would have thought

[@nraynaud]

there are financial investors looking at CEO's airplanes to try to guess if there is a merger upcoming, so now some CEO can't use the corporate airplane for some meetings. But my understanding is that rich people carved an exception to avoid broadcasting their tail number, I forget the exact working of it.

[@jhmcglynn]

I think there’s a setup option that allows you to be anonymous on the public displays but the feds still sees your N-number.

[@freepilot7732]

Though I can drive around in my car without being tracked. I'm getting tired of being a pilot.

[@MoonRambo702]

Cars will be tracked more precisely eventually. The older models are phased out and they will add some new regs for “our safety”. They already have plate readers and traffic cams, alot of newer cars have cell and satellite connections. Some cities have programs where business owners security cams are looped in with the PD who runs facial recognition software. Besides all that, most carry a cell phone everywhere. 99% of us leave a digital trail all over the place. We are going full China here pretty soon lol.

[@freepilot7732]

@@MoonRambo702 true. I bought a brand new Cadillac a few years ago. It has a, "black box" for my safety. Yeah right. It's for the insurance company to fault me at any accident if I claim to be not at fault. It shows even how far I had the steering wheel turned at time of impact and the like. Sick.

[@MoonRambo702]

@@freepilot7732 everyday we trade more privacy and freedom for “safety”

[@freepilot7732]

@@MoonRambo702 without really any choice of our own either, we'll from some which ruin it for the rest of us. Sick. Never did I need some entity Keri me safe. I am an adult. I pay taxes to a government to uphold or borders and make roads and infrastructure. That's pretty much it. So I thought.

[@jpdurr]

Poor Woman??? Actions have consequences. She made some very poor decision.

[@jpdurr]

sure it is, just like drunk driving, until there is a crash.@user-zm7qz5fq2d

[@homertalk]

That's some harsh punishment. Let see if they continue to enforce the rules equally. I'm sure this wouldn't happen to one of their own.

[@echopapacharlie]

This lady, Martha Lunken, WAS one of their own. Before retirement she was FAA's safety inspector in that region for many years. And she was known for her strict enforcement of rules back then, too.

[@ulbuilder]

If she did turn it off, she got the punishment that is spelled out in the regs and she has no excuse for not knowing that. I think the main issue here is did she turn it off. Maybe the FAA could not see the data because she was so low to the ground, no line of sight to an FAA tower. Maybe the equipment was malfunctioning. Or maybe she did turn it off.

[@jimdeboer84]

This system is like the driving style recorders that insurance companies provide that are supposed to save you money by showing you are a safe driver. Unfortunately, this device also records any infractions such as speeding. If you loan your car to a friend or relative and they are an unsafe driver (grand children), your rates may go up. The money you may save is very little and not worth have a permanent infraction on your record.

[@toldibldr]

Excellent info .Thank You

[@hpsindustries]

Last time I checked my airplane flies just fine without a license, a medical, or the faa. The faa can go drown itself.

[@billclisham8668]

What's the new old saying? Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[@michaerun]

You can make your track private, but that is only effective for the app's. FAA can still see and look up. Don't know if you put a specific N in, if the apps can look it up, for example if you want to review your own flight. Could be a follow on video.

[@billlattimer3841]

Yep, you sure can - example: flightaware.com/live/flight/N77BH/history/20210418/0051Z/

[@joesmith-dk3uz]

I am not a pilot, but doesn't it make sense that signal loss at that moment is possible, just as it is with cell phones, or sirius xm radio, when an obstruction of some sort or interference of signal? seems to me that if adsb is installed, that it would be on constant when ignition is on, for this very reason. no off switch.

[@victoryfirst2878]

You said that the system once installed on the plane must be on all the time. Since this unit uses electricity that item is installed through a circuit breaker or fuse depending on planes age. This could cause a problem without the pilot intervention. Who in there right mind would opt to install something like this fella??? This is just a sham and this agency should be put out of business. Pretty soon they will want to know if you changed your briefs or panties.

[@dereklacy]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

[@migueldenovi5873]

The end doesn't justify the means... regardless of all the benefits of the ADS-B, there should be no obligation of having your position recorded by the government or anyone else. At least on private own aircraft.

[@danddietz]

I’m surprised the FAA hasn’t been sued over data privacy concerns.

[@witwisniewski2280]

Guilty until proven innocent? She can't even see the records of reception collected against her. I study radio propagation and see lots of ways and reasons why a signal disappears (becomes un-receivable as it can't entirely disappear) without any tampering or malfunction of the avionics. In my research, I see aircraft temporarily 'disappear' all the time.

[@mhilderbrand7693]

Wow! It really makes you think, doesn’t it? 😄

[@dr_jaymz]

Hang on a moment.... Their case is based around intentionally disabling ADSB to evade detection. I find our ADSB record usually stops at about 400ft when we descend too low for it to be received. If you fly under a bridge you are pretty low. Which means you cannot say for certain that it was disabled. She probably decided to hang up her flying boots anway.

[@andrewalexander9492]

It all depends on where the ADS-B ground receivers are located. I know that taxiing aircraft at my local airport show up clearly and reliably on flight tracking websites. The flight tracking websites (FlightRadar24, Flightaware, etc) operate mostly on ads-b data collected by private individuals operating their own base stations and forwarding the data to the tracking website. My neighbor operates such a tracking station, and also records ATC audio which he forwards to liveATC.com. I don't have any specific knowledge about the tracking stations in that area, but if there are some located close by, it's entirely possible that they could reliably track an ads-b equipped aircraft right down to treetop level.

[@breytac]

Agreed. Deadzones, electrical interference (man made and natural), terrain and man-made objects stop the reception of electrical signals. There are even deadzones on the planet where ADS-B receivers don't pick up signals because of the curvature of the planet. Intermittent equipment failures also happen. But you can't tell a bureaucrat these things because to them, the rules can't be broken. Ever. Not even by radio signals that travel in straight lines and don't know that they're supposed to go up and over objects and terrain instead of bouncing off them and going off in a random direction.

[@av8rshane491]

She went back and took her PPL check ride after a couple years and got her certificate back. She was also a DPE. I just ordered a book she wrote. I want to build a AL-3 legend cub with no electrical system then the transponder/ alt encoder and adsb are not required except in class A,B and C airspace.Fly low, fly slow with both doors open.

[@LowWingFlyer]

No, she went back and did her checkride after the suspension and got her license back.

[@jeffbrinkerhoff5121]

She did stay flying but had to start from student again.

[@Milkmans_Son]

adsb is line of sight, is it not?

[@grahamjones6712]

Yes but it travels pretty far at airplane altitudes. So the tower that picked her up may not of had line of sight as she went under the bridge.

[@russellsmith3825]

If this continues, demand for "vintage" aircraft will surge

[@alanaspurling6469]

It doesn’t have to be vintage, a new airplane doesn’t need to have an electrical system installed?

[@flexairz]

It also works just with Mode C transponders...

[@warsurplus]

Many on this board are stating that when her transponder was below the sweeping ATC interrogating radar beam to her transponder because of her low altitude, then the return ADS-B out data flags may not have been received by ATC. However, my understanding of ADS-B is that it is publishing ADS-B out data every 1/2 seconds regardless if it is interrogated by ATC radar. There are space based receivers and other ground stations that can receive ADS-B data streams independent of the ATC radar returns. Is this only for the big airlines, or does GA ADS-B operate in this fashion too? The typical ATC traffic radar typically sweeps every 5 seconds, where ADS-B is publishing its data at ten times that frequency of every 1/2 second and is not dependent on ATC radar interrogation for ADS-B return out data. Please enlighten me if I have a misunderstanding for how it works with GA.

[@CochranMinistries]

Just installed a Garmin GDL50w/ADS-B. Seems it's subscription free and receives (as is). For install, it pairs with my Garmin 660 that is the only item which has any info on me, though no tail number was ever required. To my understanding, my GDL50 w/ADS-B (IN) receives data including info from other aircraft equiped with ADS-B OUT. Is not this the issue here? ADS-B OUT and not ADS-B IN?

[@louielacy9946]

No the Garmin GDL50 will pick up all aircraft that have their transponders queried !!

[@NighthawkCarbine]

The precipitating event was he reckless flying under the bridge. Accept she messed up and move on.

[@PRH123]

That kind of data for private non commercial aircrsft should not be publicly available, the potential for all kinds of abuse is enormous...

[@N1WP]

Martha Lunkin, she just got her license back.

[@kirkmorrison6131]

Thanks I am getting ready to build an Air Camper, I will not add an ADS-B unless I have to. Not because I plan to break rules, but just because it has to always be on.

[@donaldgilbreath4200]

What if you buy a plane that has ADS-B, but you don't want one, can you take it out? Or just leave it off all the time, because it says, for the purpose to avoid detection. To me that would mean a specific act, not just keeping it off all the time.

[@gilkennedy7638]

I land on my private property and when I look flight aware it say that I land at the Identifier of a private airstrip that is about 3mi from my house ( It does it every single time ) , so what is the accuracy of that system ??

[@steveaviator2774]

Is that a heavy ADS-B radio on the table in front of you? Or portable radio for an ultralight?

[@muhammadsteinberg]

Looks like a Ham radio receiver.

[@texastyrannyresponseteam794]

big brother is out for everyone.. from a safety standpoint, it's great.. but if they are gonna use it to ding good pilots , that's too much..

[@MoonRambo702]

I’d rather be unsafe, than tracked like cattle..

[@RaceMentally]

I don’t agree with her flying under the bridge and or turning off ADS B. I do think she made 2 massive infractions. It’s a reckless. I think a huge slap on the wrist and loss of license for a year minimum should’ve been done. But maybe taking it away saved a future life or lives.

[@RaceMentally]

@user-zm7qz5fq2d yes

[@2quickies]

In enjoy your videos , but I sure don’t understand why you seemed as though tracking planes is a good thing. Absolutely for collision avoidance,; however not as a private citizen. The stalker down the road doesn’t need to know where my daughter has flown or is flying.

[@homomorphic]

It is entirely possible that the ads-b transmission was not received when flying under the bridge. Does the ads-b have a buffer? It seems that the most obvious reason for the missing data would be the fact that while flying low in a river valley that the ads-b transmission was blocked by terrain.

[@jdrissel]

I have had the thought that an asd-b logger might be a good thing to carry on board. I could see flying down a river or canyon and going to pop up over a bridge when a flock of birds, a drone, or another aircraft appears in your path. You have no clue what the other airborne objects might do, so it might be safer to fly under, but doing so will almost guarantee that there will be some impact on rf propagation. If your ads-b transmitts in this window you might get some flack, perhaps as bad as revocation, but having a GoPro video and a log of your actual ads-b transmissions would probably let you keep on flying.

[@andrewalexander9492]

If you're flying down a river or canyon low enough that you have to climb to go over a bridge, you're very likely already violating 91.119. Not for certain, a pretty good chance of it. It's pretty easy to not notice peopl or structures and come within 500 feet of them, and while the FAA won't define "congested area", looking at NTSB appeals involving places the FAA said were "congested", there doesn't have to be much there to be considered congested, and thus you need to be at least 1000 feet AGL. A lot of pilots thing that "congested area" means the areas marked yellow on the sectionals. This isn't remotely true, the faa has found places with just a few buildings in a relatively rural area to be "congested"

[@douger1957]

Was it "inoperative" because she turned it off just before she flew under the bridge?

[@scottinohio701]

Does ADSB work at ground level?? Thought you had to have some altitude???

[@ulbuilder]

I was thinking the same thing. She was even below ground level flying under that bridge. In the article she says she had been making brutal crosswind landings and that the radar recordings from the FAA show the ADS-B data being intermittent. Her mechanic noted that the transponder was loose in it's mount but seems like one would need a loose connector, not just a mount, for it to be intermittent. Would be interesting to see the radar data. Was it only intermittent at low altitude? How intermittent was it?

[@thomasmaughan4798]

ADS-B works fine on the ground. It's range is line-of-sight so between two aircraft on the ground probably only a few miles; but if only one is in the air it's good for a similar distance as VOR. If no other aircraft is in the area then it doesn't matter; ADS-B is intended for aircraft to aircraft situational awareness.

[@ulbuilder]

@@thomasmaughan4798 in this context the question is if the FAA towers can pickup and record the ADS-B data from an airplane on the ground or at very low altitude. If she was not line of sight to an FAA tower it seems plausible that is why they see gaps in the data.

[@jpdurr]

The Record was not missing, it was not recorded. Missing would apply to if it was recorded and then tampered with.

[@gilkennedy7638]

You are playing with words, but I like it

[@paulhendershott667]

I believe the ADS-B used to have an anonymous mode, where it would broadcast your altitude and speed and location but not your tail number (but still maybe an "identifier" connected with the aircraft). I'm not sure if that was for units that were installed before ADS-B became mandated that fateful January day. Anyone know it that was true or am I misremembering?

[@billlattimer3841]

ADS-B requires your IACO code. You can hide your N-number, but not from the FAA.

[@paulhendershott667]

@@billlattimer3841 Thanks Bill, that makes sense!

[@alanaspurling6469]

Also as I understand the anonymous mode requires a VFR 1200 squawk code?

[@gilkennedy7638]

Just don't think the statement of you ONLY need ADSB when going in controlled air space is true, I'm not a CFI but my understanding is only class B need ADSB class C is controlled but you don't need ADSB

[@13FPV]

ADS-B is rf. She went under the bridge, no rf reception. Good excuse in my book.....

[@KISHANTALKS]

Superb Superb support Done👍

[@johnneedy3164]

I'm not a pilot but that thing sounds like to much government

[@dougkathydavies3024]

Is that a Collins receiver on the bench in front of you?

[@HomebuiltHELP]

You are on the right track - but no it is a Gonset GSB100 transmitter in need of repair. I am a ham operator from way back....

[@robsteenweg1517]

Believe that ADS-B antennas are mounted on the bottom of the aeroplane signal booking at low altitude could have occurred.

[@budt3973]

How is the burden on the pilot to prove her innocence (e.g, she has to prove that she did not deactivate the ads-b); the burden of proof should be on the gov’t to prove she did, for that’s how are court system work -innocent until proven guilty!

[@evil_me]

LAS is Las Vegas not Los Angeles I thought 🤔

[@zmanmd1641]

Everyone here is missing that she was a former FAA flight safety inspector, the equivalent of a police detective. She was given the punishment because she was was the equivalent of a dirty cop, so they wanted to make an example of her. She admitted to intentionally doing the flight violation, so the ADS-B missing data was gravy on top of her actions. Flying is a privilege and not a right, so pay attention or lose your ability to fly or even your life. Play stupid games........

[@billyjack3361]

She did something stupid and dangerous and made every GA pilot look bad. ADS-B is a life saving technology. If your looking to block your ‘N’ number, that’s fine. But if your trying to defeat its function than give up flying and take up golf. My family and I will thank you.

[@briana3467]

So why are there no ramifications for police officers who switch off their body cameras to conceal wrong doing?

[@whoanelly737-8]

“For the purpose of evading detection”

[@charlespierce3647]

And now you know the real reason we have ADSB out.

[@Airplane_Willy]

I get what you’re saying, but ADS-B in doesn’t work without ADS-B out.

[@pilotandy_com]

8:15 I’m pretty sure that’s not how the law works. In the country I fought for, free men were considered innocent until proven guilty. That’s the real discussion to be had, how the government can deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

[@andrewalexander9492]

I'm pretty sure that *is* how the law works. It's not a criminal trial, it's a civil proceeding under administrative law. There is no presumption of innocence. Nor does the FAA have to prove their case "beyond a reasonable doubt". Those are all elements of a Criminal trial. In a Civil proceeding, the standard is what the "preponderance of evidence" shows. A "preponderance" could be as little as 51% of the evidence. The FAA doesn't have to prove that she turned the Transponder off, they just have to show that most of the evidence points to intentionally turning it off vs a malfunction.

[@almerindaromeira8352]

And to add to what Andrew said, such activities like driving and flying are not rights. They are concessions made by the government. Hence the name license. Those "freedoms" can be removed.

[@lukasethan6429]

Lol. I see certain “shell companies” turn theirs off and on all the time from my local airports. Ahhhh, the fairness 🤣🤣🤣

[@muhammadsteinberg]

WOW!!!...Somebody I know back in the early 90's flew to Meigs Feild and on the way back to Aurora dipped down into an empty Comisky Park (WhiteSox). He wouldn't dare do that now. Foreflight, Garmin pilot even FlightAware as well as other systems know what you're doing via subscription or Adsb-out. Having a lil mischief fun could get you called to the carpet to explain yourself. 😥 I didn't know you could start from the beginning and get a new license if revoked. I never hope to get caught up in that mess....WHEW!!! I've also noticed that flight tracking isn't always accurate. I've flown a few cross countries just to give my engine a good charge and lube. When I landed, I pulled up the flight paths and they had gaps. This was from apps that all have access to adsb information. She could actually be innocent of the nefarious part. The mischief part?...Well, I can't toss stones...lol

[@muhammadsteinberg]

@@bertruttan129 Nobody is forgetting that! I believe the post says she got busted for turning the adsb off or it appearing as if she turned it off.

[@crissd8283]

I think ADS-B is a great tool, however, I dont like big brother always watching me. It is wrong that the government forces me to send them my location that they can record forever.

[@tiki_t]

It's part of the interdependency of in-flight communication with ATC to make NextGen work. Part of their objective is to automate most of ATC which allows them to reduce spacing to increase flight traffic and decrease delays. Their systems in theories will kick out emergency alerts instead of having to have their eyes everywhere. It's supposed to (in theory) increase air traffic safety by giving advisories instead of allowing the, "Try not to get hit," approach that exists in busy airspace.

[@crissd8283]

@@tiki_t So why as a not for higher flight, can't I get a random ID issued every time my ADS-B is turned on? Why does it need to know my N number?

[@tiki_t]

@@crissd8283 If I had to guess, probably emergency response, context and accountability. In my community if people look up a flight N number and see it tied to law enforcement, medical response, patient transport, fire, etc, no one complains. But if someone is goofing off and crash, they send out a search party, knowing what or who they are looking for and where. Or for example, if someone is circling low over their home, since the FAA doesn't currently have the capacity to detect everything (NextGen isn't completely rolled out), it empowers people to hold pilots with bad flight behavior accountable. Big brother is really only watching if there is something to see. Take a look at the flight tracking tools. There are way too many flights daily to see/care about everything.

[@429thunderjet2]

Ok, Im confused here. Aircraft had transponders before ADSB in & out. So are they the same transmitter now? Or could there actually two now, a conventional transponder and an ADSB out transmitter? Also I believe the FAA made an example out of Martha! I looked up pictures of the bridge, it's huge! 249' high and 440' between the longest span, so anybody that can land on a 75' wide runway should easily be able to go under that bridge. That's why she states it wasn't dangerous. Also she maintains she didn't turn her transponder off and when it was later checked was found to be loose they said. Also ADSB goes out at our little country regional airport when aircraft get below around 1,200 ft AGL from what I've seen. Yes yes, I know it's still illegal what Martha did. Oops! I just noticed this thread started eight months ago.

[@noimnotarobotcanubeleiveit7024]

adsb is a 1ghz signal. as this frequency is only good line of sight, as she went into the valley the signal would be lost to ground stations. no fault

[@crawford323]

Mixed feelings on this.

[@rogerlarson8040]

Flying down into that canyon would have lost the signal with the adsb.

[@houstonfirefox]

I'm absolutely certain she didn't turn it off to avoid detection. It's a simple matter of line-of-site to the nearest ADSB receiver to capture the flight. I run PiAware to receive ADSB and feed to FlightAware and I'll frequently lose track of aircraft below 100' doing touch-and-goes at local airports. According to your logic, all of these student pilots (and instructors) are "turning off" (insert picture of on-off switch here) ADSB for the purposes of avoiding their 'illicit' touch and goes. If I was Martha, I'd have the FAA prove their nearest ADSB receiving station could in fact receive any returns such as a low pass ABOVE the bridge. Hogwash!

[@jsauerii]

Something tells me this is soon to be mandatory everywhere for everyone in the air, eventually 103 Included....

[@rustusandroid]

Interesting... She couldn't PROVE she was innocent... I thought it was supposed to be the other way around.

[@f.n.schlub2269]

Therein lies the court challenge.

[@donbrowncfi]

They have video of her proving she did this. The only way to prove she didn't do it was if the video didn't exist. Also it's not a criminal case, it's a regulation violation, you are not presumed innocent unless it's a criminal case.

[@muhammadsteinberg]

@@donbrowncfi Video of her turning the adsb off? That's what got her in trouble.

[@rustusandroid]

@@donbrowncfi They have video that it happened, not that she did it on purpose.

[@rustusandroid]

@@donbrowncfi That is to say, that have no proof she purposefully turned off the ADSB. And I agree about the criminal aspect, but it's the mindset that should prevail and not be circumvented by semantics of a regulation vs law violation.

[@TheDroopYJ]

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?? Apparently, this does not apply to the FAA.

[@V1RotateFly]

73 de K3DY! Safe Flying !

[@glennstubbs8232]

Perhaps I missed something, but in section 9 and section 30 both stipulate "with intent to deceive". It doesn't say you can't turn it off, you just can't turn it off with intent to deceive. Martha's problem was that she may have turned it off to fly under a bridge (a good radio engineer could beat that since she flew under a metal bridge) then maybe lied about turning it off. If I turn off ADS-B when flying from one uncontrolled airport to another, or even to a class "D" airport it doesn't appear that I'm in violation since I'm not doing anything stupid or illegal and I'm not trying to deceive anyone. Show me the reg that forbids turning it off, without any qualifiers.

[@donbrowncfi]

Incorrect, 91.225(f) "Equipped aircraft must have it on and in transmit mode at all times" even on the ground. There are exceptions but nothing you listed would qualify.

[@1STGeneral]

Maybe she'll have a show with Snoop called Flying high and low

[@rogerlarson8040]

What is the actual code for flying under a bridge?

[@andrewalexander9492]

I think you're supposed to Squawk 7100 for flying under bridges. Power lines are 7200. 7300 is reserved for flying under the St Louis Arch.

[@rogerlarson8040]

Ha, I was talking about the code that says it is illegal to fly inder a bridge

[@andrewalexander9492]

@@rogerlarson8040 CFR Title 14 Part 91.119 It doesn't actually explicitly prohibit flying under a bridge, but flying under a bridge would violate several provisions of the regulation.

[@thoxbui]

I still don’t understand, is it “ADSB caused pilot to lose license” or is it “pilot broke the rule and lost her license”? It seems a lot more like the second case.

[@HomebuiltHELP]

Let me 'help': The pilot did not lose her license because of the bridge flying. (you get a suspension for that) The pilot lost her license because the ADS-B was inoperative. Now if you know that she turned it off - then yes, it's because of breaking a rule. If, however, the ADS-B malfunctioned, as she claims - then ADS-B caused the pilot to lose here license. Subtle but important difference!

[@mhilderbrand7693]

@@HomebuiltHELP Is it true that if you lose your license, you can go back through the training and get another one? I did not realize that!

[@HomebuiltHELP]

@@mhilderbrand7693 FAA will make that decision. Sometimes a waiting period too.

[@johnreed8872]

Hey guys, quick question.. so is it there for illegal to begin a flight with the equipment turned off , kept off , while remaining in airspace not requiring ADSB? Once equipped it has to be on during any flights? I've been reading Martha's work in Flying mag for years! Thanks for the update and info!

[@HomebuiltHELP]

@@johnreed8872 To the Best of my knowledge (please speak up if you know otherwise) once equipped with ADS-B, that equipment is not to have its functionality disabled. Quite different than rules regarding a transponder in pre- ADS-B days? Comments from those that can confirm or deny?

[@davidflyboy9902]

Our government is out of control.

[@jimdeboer84]

What does ADS-B stand for for those of us non lingo educated aviation video watchers?

[@andrewalexander9492]

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast. It continually broadcasts your position, Altitude, Groundspeed and direction of flight, among other data.

[@Notaslave1961]

Las Vegas not Los Angles..... LAS vs LAX

[@TomasAWalker53]

I have to say that the permanent removal of your licence is excessive. You mentioned being able to redo your training to get it back. Sounds like a re-education camp. A two-year suspension would be plenty in my view. Especially with her professional background. I wonder how much of her punishment wasn't just to educate the public which again, I feel is unduly harsh. They could have motivated her to sign on to a couple of summers travelling to all the airshows that attract large numbers of pilots and require her to spread the word of her humiliating experience and drive the point home that way. Every Tom, Dick and Harry aviation media type would love to tell her story. I wonder if it hadn't been for the CCTV cameras on the bridge, and barring any bystander ready to video her stunt, would she likely have gotten away with it?

[@cheapskateaquatics7103]

I agree that it may have been excessive. However, as she was someone who was very experienced, flight instructor, and had even worked for the FAA, she knew better than to do that. She said she flew under bridge out of sponteney and for no other reason.

[@techexpedition]

Ad at 13:30 💀

[@freepilot7732]

It's not for my safety. It's about big brother. If it was all about safety then they wouldn't record and keep data for any much length of time.

[@krisknowlton5935]

@Free Pilot I agree with you. I think it was Burt Rutan that said several years ago that the technology was out there to have a heads up display so that you could "see" in zero/zero conditions. That would improve safety would it not? I haven't heard that that technology is in airplanes now but then I haven't flown in over fourteen years

[@freepilot7732]

@@krisknowlton5935 they do have that technology.

[@travisweide9071]

Did not know that you cant shut it off... become a private pilot they said....

[@embededfabrication4482]

if you're going to fly under a bridge do it at night

[@scottmiller4711]

I guess it is not the violation but the attempted coverup that got her…

[@gabrielsierra865]

Exactly, if they got the underbridge flying data, nothing would had happened.

[@arturojgtful]

Thank you for sharing this "If you turn off your transponder" consequences. It is not your intention to judge her but, a CFi + show-off + knowing the rules + reckless behavior? I'm sorry but GUILTY.

[@gorgly123]

There is a way to prevent your tail number showing up on Flightaware. Not sure how you do it but I've seen it done.

[@culpeppersautomotive]

I thought you could go incognito vfr.

[@gorgly123]

@@culpeppersautomotive I think you can also turn off your transponder and therefore ADSB if you are in a formation flight to prevent ATC collision alerts.

[@701Builder]

I have a Garmin GDL 82. On install you can wire in a switch that will disable only your tail number from being displayed on others ForeFlight or flight aware type programs. But the FAA will still know who you are.

[@billlattimer3841]

@@gorgly123 This rule is still in proposed state, but many controllers will explicitly ask formations to turn off all but Lead's XPNDR.

[@halfrhovsquared]

@@billlattimer3841 - Indeed. I was “lead” in a two-ship flight and ATC asked me to tell the other aircraft to turn off his transponder. Even though he’d set it to “Standby”, ATC were still getting returns from it and it was messing up their display. (For reference. I’m in the UK)