Westhawk...
Smart, well balanced post, and many of us know what you're saying to be true.
However, as the Fed's like to say; Rules is rules (paraphrasing) but there's that sticky little number called burden of proof.
No argument that the outfit concerned merit a severe slap in the chops, but this Inspector (POI) is beyond the pale. Did he actually know what a deposition is? and that he would be required to support his demand for emergency revocation with something, anything, that even vaguely resembled proof of non-compliance.
The entire thing is embarrasing to watch and the guy seems oblivious to the fact that it looks like a 'witch hunt'...The judge is unlikely to bring the operators reputation into consideration, and that's a good thing in this case that reputations are not considered, as their legal reputation could only be considered flawless after 30 years with no violations, But the fact wasn't challenged by the fed. Although he was a hurting unit by that point and was looking for the nearest door...
It couldn't be that hard for a smart POI to 'get the goods' on theses guys, but apparently the FAA is fresh out of smart or even partially competent POI's...
Blue skies...170'
Last edited by 170'; 4th Oct 2011 at 08:20.