Turkey Shut down to us FAA guys and N-reg

[noneya]

All of us FAA guys just got screwed and you EASA guys flying N-REG


A0015/16 (Issued for KICZ LTAA LTBB) - SECURITY..UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ADVISORY FOR TURKEY
THOSE PERSONS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH A BELOW ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO
FLY INTO OR OUT OF ANY AIRPORT LOCATED WITHIN THE ISTANBUL (LTBB) OR
ANKARA (LTAA) FLIGHT INFORMATION REGIONS (FIR).
A.  THIS NOTAM APPLIES TO:  ALL U.S. AIR CARRIERS AND COMMERCIAL
OPERATORS; ALL PERSONS EXERCISING THE PRIVILEGES OF AN AIRMAN
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FAA, EXCEPT SUCH PERSONS OPERATING
U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT FOR A FOREIGN AIR CARRIER; AND ALL
OPERATORS OF AIRCRAFT REGISTERED IN THE UNITED STATES, EXCEPT WHERE
THE OPERATOR OF SUCH AIRCRAFT IS A FOREIGN AIR CARRIER.
B.  NO PERSON OPERATING AN AIRCRAFT, REGARDLESS OF REGISTRY, MAY
DEPART TURKEY TO ANY UNITED STATES AIRPORT.
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS ADVISORY WILL BE RE-EVALUATED BY 15
AUGUST 2016. 16 JUL 01:50 2016 UNTIL 31 AUG 23:59 2016 ESTIMATED. CREATED: 16
JUL 02:04 2016

[BizJetJock]

The news might give a clue to the reason...
Not sure "screwed" is the word, so much as Uncle Sam looking after his less clued up nephews and neices.

[noneya]

:ugh:Only that I got two crews stuck there, not to mention the owners...

[EatMyShorts!]

Why don't you just fly them out? As long as they land somewhere in between, they can return to the US. Maybe not via Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and North Korea.

[noneya]

Because the ban is for any flight into or out of Turkey. Not just to the US, that is directed to the Airlines and applicable to every aircraft.

[CL300]

My reading is that a flight TO USofA direct is NOT possible, however, DoD will not keep US citizen stranded in Turkey, or anywhere else. It has always been allowed to get all US assets out . It does not seem to concern FAR 91 ops..Is there any US airline operating a schedule to IST ?

[galaxy flyer]

Oh, yes, it does. Read the part about, "exercising the privileges of an airman certificate issued by the FAA."

GF

[CL300]

the wording is one thing, and there is an exception, if the operator is an air carrier. This was written for 121, not 91.
The only reasoning behind would be that there is intelligence about a (some) turkish airmen holding an FAA license and posing a threat...

[galaxy flyer]

You're reading into it--there is no mention of Part 91 or 121, just that a FAA-certificates cannot fly into those FIRs unless he is working for foreign carrier. The wording is identical to the SFARs restricting ops in Libya, Iraq and Ukraine. The exception is ONLY way a US licensed pilot can legally operate in Turkey, that is flying a US registered plane for a foreign operator. And, yes, I've asked the NY International Office earlier regarding those SFARs.

ALL PERSONS EXERCISING THE PRIVILEGES OF AN AIRMAN
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FAA, EXCEPT SUCH PERSONS OPERATING
U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT FOR A FOREIGN AIR CARRIER;

GF

[CL300]

I am just saying, that i understand fully the wording, and its consequences. But the scope in which it was written contains mistakes, and the blanket coverage of things forgot, N reg aircraft part 91 flying in europe. As such, an exemption should be granted to take them out from there.

[Booglebox]

I find it very amusing how the Americans think that they can control what happens outside their borders.

[FerrypilotDK]

Oh good grief. Fly the aircraft out to anywhere in Europe!!! No one can prevent it and to strand an owner in Turkey that doesn't want to be there? If you allow this, then the owners need new management!
If the pilots don't want to do it because they also think this notam stops them, then call me.
Put them on an airline and call me. They can pick it up again in London and fly home.