Martha Lunken Punished - Fired DPE Update - and More! TakingOff

UPDATE VIDEO: • Martha Lunken - Bridge...
(Please Subscribe!) Legend pilot Martha Lunken was punished severely by the FAA for flying under a bridge. Update on the FAA's termination of a popular DPE out of the San Antonio FSDO last year. And Zara Rutherford is attempting a teenage record in aviation! This and more on the week's aviation buzz.
Follow Zara: flyzolo.com/
Bidding on the posters to benefit Woody Williams Foundation and Air Safety Institute:
www.ebay.com/i...
www.ebay.com/i...
www.ebay.com/i...
www.ebay.com/i...
Sponsored by: Gold Seal: groundschool.com/
Join Hangar Club or buy the high quality Comfort Color Teeshirts, Polos and Hats to support our channel at takingoff.s-fi... !
Support Christy at patreon.com/pilotchristy
And don't forget to buy your Flying Eyes sunglasses at www.flyingeyesoptics.com using the TAKINGOFF code for 10% off!

[@gomphrena-beautifulflower-8043]

Helicopter pilot Joel Boyers, indeed! He rescued my daughter’s in-laws - and their dogs! - from the roof of their home in a scary, daring, wonderful rescue! We’re all so thankful for Joel. Thanks for the shoutout. He deserves the accolades!

[@TakingOff]

True hero!!

[@TakingOff]

Would love to have him on the show In The Hangar if you have a way to reach him.

[@joshuataft5541]

Amazing I. Glad they were saved.. such a good story with a good outcome

[@JustinC721]

Martha came clean about the incident and made zero attempt to lie about it or cover it up. That should tell you that she didn't intentionally turn her transponder off.

[@NuncNuncNuncNunc]

Except FAA's position is that she is covering up.

[@teijaflink2226]

Imagine at her age and with her experience behaving like some stupid selfie kids though (even if she was out for attention or a selfie but pretty much the same thing.

[@Jake-bt3fc]

It's pretty easy to come clean after you've been caught red handed on video, lol.

[@JustinC721]

@@Jake-bt3fc She notified the FAA prior to having been made aware of the video.

[@alschwartz8732]

I give her a lot of credit to check that off the bucket list, knowing the risk.

[@briant6333]

are these the same people who said Bob Hoover looked imprecise in his routine and grounded him

[@peternyceiii8625]

I am a 47 year retired airline, military, and general aviation pilot with over 19,000 hours. I would expect to be punished for flying under that bridge, but total revocation is extreme bureaucratic overkill. Anybody remember the Bob Hoover incident and the backlash against the FAA? This kind of punishment is not conducive to mutual respect and trust in the flying community.

[@dickfitswell3437]

They want division. All of these people who are in power don't understand how to use it for the benefit of the rest of the flock. I swear there needs to be a class on perceived power because it's so far out of control at this time in history. As soon as these people get power they think they are the kings and queens and become monsters while the people riding their D__K will keep telling them "everyone loves you. You are the best. You are making decisions tougher than anyone else has had." Like you said "total revocation" is straight up bonkers. In the Marines we had a Funny that LoVeD making examples out of young Marines. I got caught in Tijuana without a pass back in 2001. The OIC of my unit made me write a 1000 word essay on the dangers of going to Mexico. I thought...easy...but then He said "write it in black ink and the only words that count towards the 1000 words are 4 letters or bigger. Then underline each one of those 4 letter words in blue ink. Number them in red ink. (Now I know this is a power trip.) So I did. Ends up being 10 pages. I turn it in. He says stand at the POA. He then begins grading it like I was a schoolboy. Hands it back. I'm thinking as long as I got a 70 I'm good. But he says "now write it again, fix the errors, but write in blue ink this time, use red ink for the 4 letter words, underline in black and number in pencil. I need it by COB." F me. I ask "Sir, can you just demote me and make me a PFC again" and he says "get out". So I finish and hand it in at COB. He says "Dismissed." The next morning at formation he tells the platoon "so so and so went to Mexico without a chit...he has something to tell you." I fall out and he hands me the 10 page paper and says "read it to them." He then puts the whole formation at the position of attention and I begin reading. Finally done I think. Then he says "now he will answer questions you have and YOU WILL have some questions." He made each person ask 1 question. By now I'm having a panic attack cause not only am I new, I'm shy. Halfway thru and I'm studdering, the senior Sgt falls out and sends me back into formation and he starts answering the questions and the OIC comes running out and starts berating the Sgt telling him "you don't get to answer any questions etc" and then our Sgt gave him a staredown with his eyes saying "you need to leave" and he turns back to us and asks "anymore questions" and the other guys see what's happening and ask stupid questions and the OIC realized he is being embarrassed now, just like me, and was using his power negatively. It was probably a lesson the OIC still remembers because after that day, he actually became a good OIC. He was hated his first few months but by the end of his time at our unit he was one of the best OIC's we had. Sorry so long. What I'm saying is the guy that used his power to revoked her license was having unchecked power and someone needs to put him in check and it could be something as similar to a Sgt sticking up for the new guy in front of 50 other subordinates. Power can be a great tool but Unchecked Power can destroy everything.

[@duckmeat4674]

@@dickfitswell3437 hey man thank you for your service, also wow sorry you had such a terrible OIC. Making you rewrite it, then read allowed to the formation? Honestly that's just counterproductive for a simple mistake

[@davidsoom1551]

Who's FAA is it? Joe Biden's. Cancel Everyone!

[@ILSRWY4]

There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@peternyceiii8625]

@@ILSRWY4 OK, I wasn't aware of all the history here. I can see why some would want her out of aviation. Sorry for commenting without all of the facts, but I'm always concerned about unfair treatment by bureaucrats as well.

[@georgeh.6273]

Martha Lunken deserves a 6 month suspension and then a 5 year probation period, not the death penalty to her license!

[@rustystarwood1]

That punishment was WAY WAY WAY TOO STRICT!!!

[@JohnMGreiner]

Sounds like they used the high profile case to make an example

[@THEjasonTDI]

Lots of people that get in charge have serious ego issues. If they were cops, they'd be the bad ones you read about.

[@AureliusR]

@@rustystarwood1 How was it too strict? This follows a pattern of behaviour. It's obvious she intentionally turned off the ADS-B, and who knows how many other times she'd done this before being caught by bridge workers? We don't need more impulsive pilots flying around.

[@rustystarwood1]

@@AureliusR Because you are making an assumption that she intentionally turned her ADSB off, and she is saying she didn’t. I know for a fact when you drop down into a canyon like you do when exploring for river bar landing spots, your ADSB will drop off like on its own from being out of sight of the satellites or towers. I’ve had that happen to me several times. Your track just disappears from the system for awhile, and sometimes takes a bit of time before it reappears. The FAA could have fined her and suspended her license for a period of time and that would have been appropriate enough. But to remove all her licenses indefinitely is in my opinion an abuse of government power.

[@DouglasDC3AK]

Martha did what all pilots would like to do. Thanks ,Martha ,for doing it for us.

[@rjwood6314]

You want to shut off your ads transponder to conceal illegal behavior?

[@stevemagnuson7051]

I’ve been in the aviation industry for 36 years now as a A&P/IA, and ATP. The FAA and the NTSB have become completely incompetent and impossible to work with. Glad my career is on the tail end as I am sick and tired of dealing with their BS unreasonable actions.

[@turninmonyin2noise978]

Boy you said it, those agencies are mostly top heavy bullshit job protecting bureaucrats who have all risen to their greatest incompetence. They all need a house cleaning.

[@jeremyduncan3654]

💯 to the both of you.

[@MrSoarman]

There needs to be checks and balances to the FAA to smack the overkills AND to keep them aligned,............come on!

[@johnroerich4531]

Martha deserved a six-month suspension for violating 14 CFR 91.119(c) which requires pilots to maintain "An altitude of 500 feet above the surface except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In that case, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure." This offense would have resulted in a suspension. But the FAA wanted more. She had been a so-called "loose cannon" when she worked for the FAA and was afterward often publicly critical of the agency. By claiming (without proof) she turned off her transponder, she allegedly committed a revocable offense, giving the FAA "grounds" to emergency-revoke all her tickets....a year afterward. Some emergency. On the day of the incident, she requested an approach from Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport Approach. They couldn't see her transponder. Had the FAA been objective, they would have discovered that omission on the radar tapes. She was also too low and terrain would have blocked transponder replies, so the FAA had no way to know whether she did or not. A radio shop who looked at it that day found it was loose in its mounting and intermittent. But the FAA wasn't interested in facts.

[@ILSRWY4]

She has OTHER offenses. There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the Chicago's FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@Pilotwisco]

I would have liked to see a "Community Service" approach to Martha's punishment. She is such a wealth of knowledge that she could have been suspended for a few months during which time she had to teach/mentor new students pro bono in order to get her licenses back.

[@larrymitchell3502]

That makes too much sense for a gubmint agency. It employs some outstanding individuals. Sadly, they are the exception rather than the rule. Too many of 'em exhibit worse judgement than the Aviators they're making examples of.

[@jameshyatte7230]

That disaster in Tennessee was real close to me here, we got some rain about 3 inches that day which is a lot but they got 17+ inches , just incredible amount of rain. Good on that pilot for helping those folks!

[@twistedyogert]

You don't need superpowers to be a hero.

[@ersinc9080]

It's saddening to see what folks get away with vs the over condemning that happens to others. Eminent danger a year later, yeah right

[@rcpilot805]

Ken is the man! Preaches safety, and professionalism. Great guy.

[@autophile525i]

Martha and Ken deserve better.

[@RobertLegereIII]

If she truly flew under that bridge with intent then her punishment should indeed have been severe BUT, with no priors, I don't think it was necessary to revoke her license. Afterall, 60 years of safe flight should speak for something against one bad decision...

[@desertdenizen6428]

I wonder if they are contemplating punishing Tex Johnson for rolling a 707 that was not placarded for aerobatics. The incident occurred during testing in August 1955. The fact that he died 24 years ago from old age may mitigate his actions!

[@TakingOff]

They did contemplate punishing Tex for that.

[@techsolutions8237]

I think testing was complete, and it was a demonstration flight for potential Boeing customers. Doing it over the Seafair hydroplane races no less... there is film of it...

[@coreyandnathanielchartier3749]

They just couldn't bring themselves to punishing anyone named 'Tex'.

[@jhaedtler]

On Martha, I bet there is more to this story than being told???

[@thejcarne]

No "if" about it Dan. That FSDO needs spanked by the FAA reaaaaaaal hard! Thanks for keeping up with this story Dan, I think it is doing wonders to bring attention to a serious issue in need of attention.

[@RH-xr8ms]

The FAA is not happy until everyone else is unhappy.

[@marlinweekley51]

The FAA is a worthless self serving mess. They let the airlines police themselves while applying some very ridiculous rules very unevenly to GA.

[@Kumquat_Lord]

@@marlinweekley51 that's just any three letter federal agency

[@FLY2KO]

I have an FAA employe actually saying "at the FAA were not happy till your not happy" in my WFFC 2003 video on my channel.

[@AureliusR]

Oh give me a fucking break

[@pistonburner6448]

@@AureliusR The FAA has f-ing breaks in addition to their long coffee and lunch breaks?

[@VictoryAviation]

Joel Boyers is an absolute bad ass and deserves a citizens bravery medal! Wow, what an absolute legend! I wanna hear an interview with that guy. HINT HINT Dan I absolutely love your coverage of topics. You are such an inspiration and a fantastic advocate of aviation. I'm really looking forward to meeting you someday and buying you a beer!

[@chrisbrooks6697]

The FAA will probably suspend his license because flying that close to power lines was very dangerous. That would follow the logic of everything else they do.

[@FeralPreacher]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. This punishment is excessive and cruel. The stunt of flying under a bridge needs to be tempered with a life time of service. The statement that she didn't turn off the ADSB is denied by FSDO without proof and herein is the absolute power. Hope she gets reinstated and an apology given by FSDO. Thanks for sharing.

[@MichaelLloyd]

Density altitude is something to be respected. I'm flying a C172RG out KFMN now and flying with a CFII on a hot afternoon makes for some long takeoff rolls. I don't know what to think about Martha Lunken's bridge fly under. Yes it's wrong, no I wouldn't do that, but I understand what she felt and why she did it. Stripping her certificates doesn't feel right. Transponder loose in the case... kind of sketchy/"excusey" sounding but possible. Best wishes to Zara Rutherford for a successful attempt. Almost forgot the helicopter pilot. Very class act. My son-in-law has a friend that did the same thing during the hurricane Harvey floods. Way to go Martin!!!!

[@TakeDeadAim]

They threw the book at her because she lied. The cover up is usually worse than the crime in many instances. This was one of those instances. Had she been up front and said "yeah I did it. I turned off the box" she likely wouldn't have lost everything. They knew she was lying, continued to lie AFTER they likely told her "Are you SURE that's the story you're going with"(as any interrogator worth their salt would have) so that was that.

[@ILSRWY4]

they threw the book at her because There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@techsolutions8237]

What has been the "punishment" for others who have been caught under flying bridges? Martha can't be the first to get caught doing this...

[@mhilderbrand7693]

If I am not mistaken, it is not about flying under the bridge, it is more about turning her transponder off.

[@steven2145]

@@mhilderbrand7693 Would a transponder and/or adsb work that close to the ground?

[@rustystarwood1]

@@steven2145 when I fly low thru canyons the ADSB tracking is lost. That low altitude could be the very reason it went offline during the maneuver.

[@mattbasford6299]

@T.J. Kong try that argument if you get caught speeding with other cars in your group trading the same speed. It won't work.

[@drewmortenson]

@@rustystarwood1 100%

[@Veteran_Aviator]

Maybe the FAA needs to spend a little less time harassing little old ladies that experience a lapse in judgement and a little more time investigating accidents and policing their own employees. I’m proud of that woman for her accomplishment.

[@dba750]

Well said!

[@BobSmith-uu5kj]

Indeed, they could have fined her, temporary suspend the license etc... no they had to take everything away from her. I cannot believe that lack of sympathy for an ATPL holder.

[@dm55]

A apse in judgement, Really. She new exactly hat she was doing. Don't be such a sap.

[@gitargr8]

I'm completely okay with the FAA discouraging people from flying way too close to infrastructure. This isn't Flight Sim 2020. Imagine if her "lapse in judgment" had killed people.

[@chuckschillingvideos]

She could have gotten others killed, not only herself, had she struck that bridge. It's not a trivial act on her part - it's major recklessness.

[@77thTrombone]

I click Dan's thumbnails occasionally because the subject looks interesting, and it always is as promised, so I'm satisfied. What makes me *Really Happy* is that-despite the channel's name-Dan never actually seems to take _anything_ off. That would be a real *imminent danger to aviation!*

[@TakingOff]

No kidding! ((Shudders))

[@glennstubbs8232]

A 60 day suspension for Martha, and be required to do a “ This is bad for aviation.“ Wings lecture.

[@larrywilliams7872]

I know Martha, was an Instructor when she attended Inspector Indoctrination back in the early 80's. She is top notch and was treated unjustly by the FAA. Sorry it happen Martha, blue skies and tailwinds always. I wrote a book about my experience inside the FAA "The Unruly Skies," and received many accolades about telling the inside story about what goes on inside the FAA.

[@sakumisan]

Gold Seal is a great outfit, glad they're supporting this channel.

[@joro18d93]

Martha's punishment is waaaay too severe. Her flying resume should speak for her character. I say hire an attorney and kick the Faa in the teeth. Some people and agencies feel good when they flex their muscles. There is no way the committee or person that decided this is a pilot. Furthermore the construction crew ended someone's career over a no harm situation. A short suspension would be the appropriate action. Martha if you're reading this, my sympathy for you Ma'am. I would have flown under that bridge too. I'm glad you enjoyed the experience of flying that bridge.

[@honorharrington4546]

Martha Lunken is punished for flying a small airplane under a very, very large bridge, Joel Boyers picks up passengers without landing putting himself, the helicopter, and 14 others at risk of injury and death, and is not punished. Looked at one way he's a hero, looked at another he was risking lives, ignoring regulations and rules, Without proper safety equipment. Funny how much things change depending on how you look at them. Joel is a Hero and I hope he gets recognized for his bravery. Martha Should have gotten a fine and perhaps some community service. If the FAA is ignoring a mechanical defect report from an A&P mechanic about an antenna problem the FAA needs fixing.

[@evilfluff6634]

I hope Martha gets her wings back soon.

[@ILSRWY4]

Not me. She got what she deserved, because what goes around comes around. There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@hillcrestannie]

Government has grown to big with NO oversight. We all need to be contacting our congressman.

[@rjbishop12]

I also don't buy the explanation for the transponder suddenly going out mysteriously as she approached that bridge. But I also think the FAA went overboard and is trying to make a very oversized example in her case. I think the appropriate punishment would be a 1 yr suspension of her license. She's not a "danger" to anyone, and I'm certain she will never do anything like this again.

[@edmundwest5636]

Not sure that she may not be showing signs of old age related impaired judgement which would warrant permanent suspension. Turning off the transponder hoping to get away with an unsafe action implies impaired judgement, which could also associate with degraded skills. I am OK with people who do this suffering consequences before they prove that they are a danger to others. Is there any precedent for lesser action for this? Does everyone get one free under-the bridge for kicks moment?

[@russbell6418]

Really? You think a transponder would work at or near river level? Not unless there is line of sight to the radar. The fact that it was a year pretty much confirms that it was a personal decision by somebody. Also screams bureaucratic incompetence. I agree with the rest of your comment.

[@Veteran_Aviator]

Was she in an area that required a transponder? If not then she could have it off all she wants

[@sophiejaysstuff4026]

@@edmundwest5636 You must be perfect ;)

[@53C52]

@@Veteran_Aviator 9:18 indicates she had ADS-B and CFR 14 91.225(f) requires that ADS-B OUT equipment, if installed, be operated in the transmit mode at all times (with a couple of exceptions not applicable in this case). It doesn’t matter if the airspace requires it. Transponder without ADS-B is a different case.

[@chrisvandecar4676]

This is the same attitude from the FAA when they grounded Bob Hoover, a couple of punk FAA employees trying make a name for themselves.

[@chrisvandecar4676]

@@ramillerusa yeah, I get that even said it a few times myself. Martha did work for the FAA for a long time and by all accounts is a fairly gifted pilot.

[@RobertMacCready]

BINGO!!!!!

[@martinhorton4303]

Sure Martha deserved to be punished, and as she was an ex employee of the FAA, even severely, But this "punishment" is nothing but vindictive. Why did it take a yer to take action? License suspension for a period, even a substantial period, would have been justified, but to revoke ALL her licenses is just childish and vindictive. It's even more appalling that it comes from an organization that has been complicit, numerous times over the last several decades, of turning a blind eye towards safety issues. The whole 737 max is just the latest outrage. The FAA was, in my view, directly responsible for the loss of the Turkish Airlines DC10 back in the '70s after the FAA refused to issue an AD to correct the cargo door problem highlighted by the AA incident over Windsor, Ontario. And yet, as far as I am aware, no one at the FAA has ever been disciplined for these egregious errors.

[@UncleKennysPlace]

You will find that the FAA follows no logic, and politics _are_ involved.

[@crimestoppers1877]

Interesting. What about the trend among government agency aircraft operators to intentionally shut off ADS-B transceivers when over specific locations?

[@gmcjetpilot]

It is the Gov, rules don't apply to them anymore, obey and shut up serf. BTW no more 100LL due to the climate CRISIS fraud.

[@crimestoppers1877]

@@gmcjetpilot I have found that some of these aircraft have no tail numbers and that they will fly within a 5 mile radius of airports. above 400 feet, without UAS registration and without FAA ATC knowledge. Is it only a matter of time until the next tragedy?

[@stefanhoimes]

There was recently a medical helicopter crash in Philadelphia PA with no casualties, including a sick infant being flown to CHOP (the children's hospital). Helicopter pilots are true badasses and heroes.

[@GaryMCurran]

I'm conflicted over Martha. Here is a woman who knew better, knew it was against the law, shouldn't have done it. Lapse of good judgment? Absolutely. Anyone get hurt? Nope, no property damage, no personal injury, nothing like that. I hate to pull Christie and the Wong Warrior into this, but what the pilot flying the Wong Warrior inverted did was far more dangerous, since he flew outside of the certification limits of the airplane, and he DID endanger lives, those of the people in the airplane, and possibly those on the ground underneath were the airplane was flying. I don't know, but did the FAA suspend his certifications? For Martha, a 60 day suspension, some required schooling on proper judgment and maybe a medical review of her decision making skills might be in order. I don't think the FAA acted fairly. Yeah, she shouldn't have done it, yeah, she knew better, yeah, the FAA needed to act, but there have been a lot of people who have done a lot worse and gotten away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Too much.

[@davidcollier3604]

The lesson here is that Martha had all of her certificates revoked for disabling ADS-B (whether she did or not). The FAA contends that it was done to "evade detection" for the bridge Incident. The FAR says that If ADS-B is installed it must be on at all times and cannot be disabled. If it is disabled as a means "to evade detection" that is actionable for certificate revocation. So what ever you do do not disable ADS-B for any reason. It can then be stretched to "it was done for means of evasion" if you violate any other FAR on that flight. She must now re- earn each certificate she wishes to reinstate. So if you have a Sky beacon best be sure your Nav Lights are ON at all times not just when you fly in ADS-B airspace. I think this action was excessive, but intended to send a very strong message about ADS-B tracking to us all.

[@billysandsbury7703]

The FAA judgement against Martha is just another example of a Government entity with a chip on its shoulder The lady knows more about aviation than the FAA & NTSB combined will ever know or understand If my butt was ever in a jam while flying there’s nobody id want in the left seat more than Martha

[@GaryMCurran]

@@davidcollier3604 I agree that the revokation was because of the ADS-B, but the shop that worked on it showed that it was not by design, and the FAA chose to ignore the blatant facts in the matter.

[@davidcollier3604]

@@GaryMCurran The facts did not matter. Kind of like the Bob Hoover Case.

[@dond5536]

Could she have killed one of the bridge workers with this stunt? Yes! Could she have cause property damage to the bridge? Yes! The likelyhood of ADS-B just "failing" only when she was pulling this stunt and then coming back online when it was over ( with the reliability of modern avionics) is highly suspect.

[@MonsoonEast]

In The Hanger is back? Awesome! Thanks for your time in creating this. Keep on keeping on.

[@jimmoss3233]

Bless her heart , Martha is a true aviation legend . I remember being a line boy at ISZ in the 90s and we all knew Martha and we loved her , It ain't the first time she's flown under that bridge LoL

[@tuscanofvirginia]

Martha is a legend and is one of the principle reasons I continue to read Flying Magazine. A slap of the hand would have been enough but the bureaucrats at the FAA have had it out for her because of her frankness and that's why the book was so thrown.

[@cale115]

Didn’t know Belgium has a space program. Brave and beautiful as always, no matter the outcome.

[@happyscar4978]

From the cinci area I hear it is probable that Martha received a number of breaks before the bridge incident... not certain but before getting too excited it’s worth checking into (said more to the viewers than to Dan) Great channel, objective news, and furthering the GA community! Keep it up!!

[@bradgriffith4231]

After growing up with airplanes (my dad had too many to count from 2 homebuilt Breezy's to 2 twin Aztecs & everything in between) & a dad(he loved taildraggers & even converted a TriPacer back to a TD Pacer) that had every FAA cert offered except helicopter & jets, I would say that that she got what she deserved. If I heard correctly, she had been an FAA employee & that alone should make her penalty more severe than a "regular" amateur pilot. The main point is that a pilot cannot succumb to "impulses". Airplanes aren't toys & ignorance, stupidity, or succumbing to impulses get people killed. I will not ride in any small plane unless I know the pilot well & he doesn't have the words "oops" or "Hey y'all, watch this!" in his vocabulary. Even then, I still want to sit in the right seat! I soloed in an Citabria but never much liked flying. Also taking lessons from a relative sucks! LOL I do love the technology of the Patey brothers though! Thinking back about it, the old man spent about the same amount of time in the hanger as Mike Patey does. He belonged to a club called The Airplane Factory, & they restored, modified & built numerous airplanes including making their own wooden props. He enjoyed getting a "commercial pilot" from the airport coffee shop & jumping in his taildragger that they could barely taxi!

[@kenmarchbanks4301]

If every pilot was busted for every stupid thing he/she did. There would be no pilots. Wish I knew Martha.

[@bradgriffith4231]

@@kenmarchbanks4301 Stupid pilots end up being dead pilots. You blatantly have little knowledge of what causes almost all small plane crashes(PILOT ERROR), & she, as an ex-FAA official, should be treated more harshly, since she worked for the bureau charged with making & enforcing the laws!

[@kenmarchbanks4301]

@@bradgriffith4231 I would ride with Martha under a bridge any day. I suspect I have more years in the left seat than you have lived. I have seen many bad decisions and lost a few friends who made them. If you keep flying (assuming you do fly) you will make a few yourself and if you are lucky you will survive enough of them to know which ones will kick your ass.

[@ILSRWY4]

@@kenmarchbanks4301 There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL and DANGEROUS, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@BraapZ]

🔥❤️👍😎 EXCELLENT update and truth based unbiased news report with only objective facts. THANK YOU!😉😎

[@aeroengguy448]

I've had nothing but very professional and friendly service from the NTX FSDO. I have friends in the SA FSDO who have nothing good to say about them. Hearsay? Yes, but ... the appearance of impropriety.

[@jimcurns7049]

Sure flying under a bridge is wrong, but I like Martha and have learned a lot reading her columns. She has done a lot of good for aviation and I wish her the best, which would be for her to fly again. I do think she has been used as an example to others what can happen if you get on the wrong side of the FAA. Let those who have never made a mistake cast the first stone.

[@bruggemw]

Was it dumb, yes. Did the punishment fit the crime, no. Will this slow or dissuade some from adopting ADSB and therefore making the sky less safe, maybe.

[@AmericanPiddler]

I live next to the Jeremiah Morrow Bridge! Not impressed with the FAA flexing on the folks in this video!

[@banthony3671]

I've learned from this that you rub someone wrong in the FAA you get screwed Ken and Martha.

[@jerrylittle7797]

One of the problems with bureaucracies is once you admit fault there is not going back. Don't look for much to change in San Antonio.

[@wingleberry1]

Glad to see you mention Ms. Rutherford. Thanks, Dan.

[@Cougracer67]

"FLYING mag put her column on hold until next year". But will FLYING magazine even be around next year?

[@smithnyiu]

FLYING magazine is getting thinner than a leaflet on famous Jewish sports legends.

[@peteranderson037]

Like with any bureaucracy, the FAA is a collection of people with their own motivations and flaws. They are not a hive mind. This is why the FAA, a geographically distributed federal bureaucracy with many sundry functions, acts so schizophrenic sometimes.

[@pi.actual]

The thing about the FAA, or any government entity for that matter, has always been this line that if you get caught lying or falsifying a statement of any sort you're done. The ADS-B regulation has that clause that really is all about just that - if you have it, you can't turn it off. So did Martha's transponder just happen to accidentally turn off while she flew under the bridge and then turn back on again? I suppose a decision had to be made on whether or not that was true and we don't really know how far they went to determine that. Were there other instances of her transponder intermittently turning off for no reason? But aside from that the FAA can't let someone slide based on the fact that they write articles for Flying Magazine or that they are an ex employee. What is everyone else supposed to think as they live under the same rule? Flying under the bridge maybe could be termed a "mistake" but if she did disable her transponder and ADS-B while doing it, that's not a mistake, it's deception. If that is indeed what happened then the FAA's hands are tied, it's that line that can't be crossed.

[@rjwood6314]

She turned it off to avoid consequences for knowingly committing a crime. Anyone saying otherwise is a clown

[@MerlinspopTBH]

On any online meeting, drink everything from coffee cups.

[@gunsaway1]

Extreme punishment. She could have done it inverted. That woman is a master aviator

[@bitblastr]

Kinda think with all her experience and resume, she almost should be held to a higher standard. She did something incredibly dangerous, with humans around. Losing your license doesn't seem all that bad. If she had crashed and seriously hurt or killed one of the workers, she could be facing attempted murder charges. She's lucky and should know that.

[@rigilchrist]

I'm a Brit and so can have no voice in this debate, but I have followed Martha Lunken and read all her columns in Flying magazine. I think the FAA took careful aim and shot itself in both feet over this. A more appropriate action would have been to consult with her, agree on something appropriate (say 12 month suspension) and then to make a joint public statement that shows her contrition. This would have achieved more and would have been a PR win for the FAA. She IS a public figure after all. (Other public figures can screw-up badly, but don't get this draconian treatment - I'm thinking of Jim Inhofe landing on a closed runway...)

[@Miata822]

Re: Martha. Don't know her. Not a pilot myself. What I do know was that when I was active and well known in my industry I could get service shops to write up or even backdate personal things for me if I asked as a personal favor. At the time I had the power to grant personal favors. That is real leverage when talking to a small-ish business. No, I didn't do that. Once you let personal integrity slip your employees and vendors do the same. No, I'm not saying Martha did that (asking for a falsified transponder fault report). All I'm saying is that everybody knows she probably could get it if she did ask. Sometimes it is better to admit to something you didn't do and apologize profusely than to say something people are likely to think is untrue. You are only ever issued one reputation. I'll end with two question to you pilots: If you got a wild hair one day and decided to pull this stunt in this place, would your ADSB be on? If the bridge workers had no drone on that day and had lowered a worker on a line to take photos or whatever the drone was doing and that worker had been injured or killed would you feel differently about this incident and its repercussions?

[@pulesjet]

NO PUNISHMENT should have been levied on the lady. NO one was in danger by her actions.

[@Sawta]

(Drone pilot only) My opinion on Martha is that, in spite of 60 years of competence, she made a bad call. We all do it, but frankly, she could have killed either herself, or the workers on the bridge. She could have hit the bridge and compromised the integrity of it. She took a risk that was completely and utterly unnecessary. I don't _want_ her to be punished, but she absolutely needed to be punished. I would also say that since she is someone who had a column with a flight-related magazine, the punishment was likely to be as severe as possible - she is a high profile figure, and them "letting her off easy" would open the door for people who really _really_ should not be flying to have some ammunition. I hate to say it, but they probably made the right call. It just stinks because she has an immense career, and made a bad call at the wrong time. A lot of other people probably make it off a lot lighter than she would have, but it's the correct choice, even if it stinks.

[@83RBurke]

If my grandmother decided to drive on the boardwalk because she had a thought that ‘I have to do this before I die’ then I hope it was worth it because she’s not going to be driving again. The potential consequences for Martha’s actions are far more dire. I’m not a pilot but I assume that we need a near certainty of your skill and judgement to allowed to fly, her skill may not be lacking, but I think her judgement speaks for itself.

[@dond5536]

I started reading articles by Martha Lunken and frankly was very surprised at some of the stunts she described as doing. Dropping flour bags as bombs on runways. There were many other things she described as doing (read her articles yourself) that to me violated FARS. Then the airplane that she hit while taxing and evidently went on and flew (according to the article). To me she should not have a license because she is impulsive and when I am in the air flying I do not want anyone who just decided to do something on impulse flying close to me. Then the hand prop incident. Young pilot need people to look up to and not someone who just might fly under a bridge on a whim. Sorry but she got what she deserved in my opinion. BTW: i stopped reading her articles a long time ago because of her lack of professionalism.

[@cadetrenew]

Cool story.

[@Ertizoel]

I don't fly planes, but I still find this channel very interesting.

[@jbonewitz]

Given Martha’s high profile as a widely read author and designee examiner, there was no way the FAA wasn’t going to lower the boom. To do otherwise would send the wrong message to any young pilot considering the same stunt. Look, this revocation is not a death sentence. She’s going to be fine. Some day, I think she’ll look back on this as the best thing that ever happened to her. Once she is able to begin working on reinstating her certificates, she’s going to have a pot of gold in the form of story ideas to explore. I haven’t been a fan of Flying Magazine since the Richard Collins days, and read very few of her writings. Once she’s back in the saddle, I’ll be tuning in.

[@ILSRWY4]

There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@JimsEquipmentShed]

While I agree that Martha should probably have a fairly substantial suspension, the permanent revocation is pretty strong……

[@cturdo]

Is there anything the Feds can't screw up? Asking for a country.

[@SmittySmithsonite]

With this administration, the answer is NO.

[@ToyotaTechnical]

Can anybody say "regulatory capture"?

[@grayrabbit2211]

Considering I've been battling Social Security to pay benefits for 7 months now.... And they even ignore congresscritters' offices yelling at them... Nope. This country's screwed.

[@KevinSmithAviation]

Great episode Dan. Thanks for the updates. Hope the issue with the San Antonio fsdo gets resolved. Keep up the great work. 🤘🇺🇸🛩️

[@doublesynchrohelix8613]

I never, ever,.... ever thought I'd side with "toughest book throwing rules" however... if there's one pilot you've talked about who should know better, with all that experience AND impressive reume including safety programs, Martha knew better. Additionally, if she had a "schotty" transponder, she knew that's not the time to be "spontaneous". She knew better. Unfortunately, in this day and age of influencers trying to get attention (*cough, Trevor*) picture the "GO AHEAD" the FAA would be giving all these idiots if all they did was slapped Martha's wrist. You would Guatan-Dam-Tee we would see 30' high bridge ducking, highway overpass ducking, and what's next, barn storming for views? But let's talk about the awful coincidence for our lady bridge workers were using a drone that exact day...? (or just maaaaayybee not her 1st time? hmmm makes you think)

[@tottenhamhotspurish]

I have little doubt Martha has done stunts like this. She should never be allowed to fly again.

[@dannon76]

I doubt "influencers" are worried about the FAA - it wouldn't be much of a thing to get a sport license then do something stupid because they never really wanted to be a pilot anyway.

[@alschwartz8732]

they have DPE's canceling last minute, working for flight schools, giving "closed book" private pilot check rides and this dude gets fired for not saying anything when people are taking about waterskiing....

[@CrucesNomad1]

Much respect for Martha, with the growing number of pilots the FAA needs to stress safety and it is not my call to question that.

[@ILSRWY4]

There's more to her story than just this. I'm a CFII from the Chicago area. Martha had a reputation for being unprofessional as DE on checkrides. I was already a CFII when I was working on my multi engine rating. I had Martha as my DE for my Multi engine checkride. I was warned about her unfairness and her unprofessional antics on checkrides, but thought if you know your stuff and are prepared for the "certificate you were seeking" you would have no problem. We start the oral, and I immediately realized this was going NO WHERE. She was asking me questions that had NOTHING to do with "the certificate I was seeking." She was asking me Flight Instructing questions. Specifically MEI questions. I stopped her and told her ma'am I am here for a Multi engine rating, I never trained for an MEI. Her excuse was "Well, you are still an instructor aren't you" I said yes, but I am NOT SEEKING an MEI nor did I train for an MEI nor will I be certificated as an MEI, and I never prepared for that. we got into a heated argument, and she pink slipped me after only about 20 minutes of our time. Needless to say, I REFUSED to pay her and reported her to the DPA FISDO. 3 days later I decided to go down to SPI Springfield, IL, took my multi-ride, and it was fun, smooth and a breeze, passing with flying colors. Read her Flying Mag. article "My Life of Crime" The long rap sheet only tells part of the tale. By Martha Lunken April 14, 2023. She calls West Chicago "Toxic" and the only thing toxic about the FISDO was HER! So YES - Martha got EXACTLY what she deserved, her fat ego and her snotty stubbornness caught up with her and what she did with that bridge stunt was UNPROFESSIONAL, and in the eyes of the FAA probably the Camel's straw. As I said, What goes around comes around. THANK YOU FAA!!!

[@jackriley4104]

Way too severe, and very disappointed in Flying's response . Martha is the main reason I still subscribe to the magazine.

[@joro18d93]

I'm a TN pilot too but not rotorcraft. Hero Joe saves the day for a TN family. Way to go Joe.

[@paulw.4834]

Punishment for Martha was WAY to severe. Another great government agency.

[@erictaylor5462]

I can understand rules such as a pilot not patronizing a bar while in uniform even when off duty due to the impression that would make on others seeing this, But to have someone drinking something that *MAY* be wine while attending a tele-conference while in his own home (thus no need to drive after), even if he was drinking alcohol in the meeting, so what? Was he visibly drunk? Was his behavior in any way inappropriate? Was he drinking irresponsibly? Was drinking at that time against any sort of rule or professional standard? Was he participating in the meeting as part of his professional responsibility, or as a professional expert?

[@misarthim6538]

The idea that handing out brutal punishments will somehow stop other people from doing crazy stuff is nonsensical. Most people that do this kind of things either think they won't be caught or don't realize that they're doing something prohibited. It also creates an environment where people will be more reluctant to report violations because mostly people don't want to destroy someone's life. It's people who repeatedly commit minor violations or people who display gross incompetence in flying who should lose their licenses, not someone who makes single (albeit incredibly reckless) mistake.

[@austenjarboe7782]

Is there an email for reporting incidents involving the San Antonio FSDO? I have a good one regarding their unprofessionalism.

[@AllAmericanAviation]

Thanks -- file the report here hotline.faa.gov/ You can do it anonymously

[@BravoCharlieGlobal]

Nice video Dan. I really like this presentation style from you!

[@ericstockman8622]

This is my favorite you tube channel bar none!

[@MichaelSmith-hj2kc]

Martha should be punished and the “intermittent” ADS-B is a bad fact. And the punishment should fit the crime which a year plus some community service lectures should suffice. (Although the lesson today that everyone should learn is that pretty much everything is on tape somewhere - kudos for owning up to it right away).

[@gmcjetpilot]

Joel Boyers, hope FAA does not violate him for unauthorized charter flights or flying too close to buildings and power lines.

[@grantgarlington7ACDriver]

I saw nothing else and heard nothing else when I saw that cobra… Impractical?… That’s the most practical vehicle I could possibly think of… That is beautiful

[@429thunderjet2]

How about crop dusters? I hate that term, it's aerial Ag spraying, but that's what everyone likes to say. So anyway they fly under wires, usually only the big tall ones, but so what about that? Just saying. Also I have watched the adsb go out on flight tracker for most all airplanes when they are get closer in and low landing and taking off at our little flatland airport.

[@flycory]

Great one! Loved it

[@alaskanalain]

People fly under the bridges all the time in Alaska. Like Floatplanes when landing/take off. Planes on roads used to have right of way at one time. Perhaps Martha's case proves why you should be afraid of the FAA and do what you can to avoid them. I feel like I would never go out of my way to give them any information they can use against me, or anyone else, even though I don't do anything wrong.

[@ILSRWY4]

The FAA holds flying in Alaska very differently than they do in the contiguous 48. Flying in Alaska is like flying in a different country.

[@luisbatista1103]

great info

[@commietube4273]

Turn ur volume up please. Nice channel.

[@lusher00]

Oh snap! She was my local examiner. I didn’t know she was such a rebel

[@Newmachinist]

Re Martha Lunken - punishment way to severe! But she did break the law and definitely should have been fined.

[@nunstersplace]

So all of you are saying you should only get a six month suspension and five year probation for flying under a bridge?

[@ripapa6355]

At this point, Martha should be allowed to do whatever she wants to do. She is not the problem.

[@JDToonyVizArt]

When you have put yourself in the public eye as prominently and for as long as she has, you become one of the faces of the industry you are espousing. As such, you should be held to the highest levels of accountability, especially when safety and, in this case, illegal maneuvers are involved. It would have been bad for GA overall if young or new pilots saw a prominent pilot fly under a bridge, get a slap on the wrist, and think, ‘oh, I’ll do that too! They won’t do much to me either.’

[@NuncNuncNuncNunc]

You contacted FSDO and got no response. Since 1) personnel files are private 2) there's ongoing litigation 3) you have no involvelment it is not suprising you got no comment. No need to play it up. I am, however, curious what the background was behind this. Such seemingly arbitrary actions almost always strike me as a culmination of ongoing issues. Was he in the meeting in an official capacity? Was he advised to attend/not attend? Is alcohol ever served at in person meetings (no, never, I'm sure)? FAA transparency is key.

[@karlwilliams8208]

Martha has been doing so much for so long but look how’s she’s treated, it’s appalling, disgusting and obviously unfair. Bastardized by the very people who should know better, do better. Sad indictment of the level of professional lacking in this messy situation. I hope she finds help in her fight.

[@stuartessex4535]

Cool Cookie Joel! nice one! OAP busts bridge, full respect! Massive over reaction by the authorities, hope the person who reported her is pleased with themselves😌😌

[@76pilotpeters43]

Lunkens punishment was way too severe for the action.

[@oleran4569]

She should have been temporarily suspended and no more!

[@RobtheAviator]

Totally disagree. She has no business flying. Time to hang it up. When your mind is In a state to fly a plane under a bridge at any moment due to “impulse” it’s time to quit. Otherwise it was premeditation and purposeful careless and reckless action. Unfortunately the FAA made the decision for her before she could realize it herself.

[@4-8-8-4.Productions]

I've been under that bridge many times. I don't know exactly how high it is but the deck is way up there. I would say that there is enough room to fly a 747 under it with plenty of wiggle room. A suspension for some period of time would have been appropriate but not what the FAA did. Seems like the FAA is just as corrupt on many levels as nearly every other agency.

[@83RBurke]

Sucks but who knows what could have happened if she hit that drone, or a hanging cable, there’s any number of things that could’ve gone catastrophically wrong. With her age and apparent clean flying history before this incident, and the fact that she just decided to do this at the spur of the moment, I’m thinking that cognitive decline may be playing a part. I think it’s time for granny to give up the keys.

[@chrisvandecar4676]

Given the chance the gov, will slow roll this and hope all concerned age out etc

[@grandolph9281]

Flying under a bridge is a doozie and shows pretty poor judgement. Our freedom to fly is under constant threat, premeditated or not, stunts like that only work to erode that freedom. Perhaps the punishment could have been less severe, but the FAA probably wants to make an example and prevent similar behavior from others. Hard for me to get in a twist over this one.

[@arthouston7361]

By your logic, people everywhere would have to know of that punishment. Most pilots will never hear, or care, about her punishment.

[@Suger5zero]

Martha lunken is a hero