Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
http://www.landings.com/evird.acgi$pass*98544843!_h-www.landings.com/_landings/pacflyer/nov5-2007/Nn-72-grondzik-followup.htmlThe attorney for warbird pilot Robert Skyraider Bob Grondzik said the FAA has so far declined to set a date for a meeting over the agency s decision to suspend Grondzik s ATP for six months or more.
The FAA issued the notice of impending action against Grondzik and Skyraider pilot Rick Morrison Sept. 17 following an airshow at Gillespie Field in El Cajon, Calif. sponsored by Air Group One of the CAF. It alleged that the two, flying in close formation with Grondzik in trail, clipped the aerobatic box and had flown below minimums directly over the crowd.
Grondizk s attorney, Bob Griscom, said he had requested a meeting with the FAA, who had given the pilots two weeks to respond. However, he said, they haven t returned his calls.
Following publication of a story about the issue in last month s paper, Griscom called for anyone who saw the alleged incident to contact him. He had 20 positive responses within two weeks, Griscom said, and no negative ones.
However, I need a hundred before I go to the FAA, he added. He s asking anyone who was at the Sunday show, when the incidents allegedly occurred, to contact him (see end of story).
About half the witnesses (who have called) are warbird owners, Griscom said. None said they saw anything wrong.
Pacific Flyer put in a call to the AG1 headquarters and to an AG1 officer, after sources revealed that he had allegedly demanded that Grondzik pay the CAF s insurance premium and Grondzik refused.
I don t even have insurance, since Grondzik, a non-denominational minister. My insurance is Jesus Christ.
Subsequently, Grondzik said, he learned that the official had told the air boss to file a complaint with the tower operator that the two planes had violated regulations. Grondizk said he didn t think the two were unrelated but he never called us back.
Grondzik also noted that the FAA should know that a trail pilot in a two plane formation has no idea of where he is in relationship to speed or altitude, only his position relative to the lead plane.
In conversations with other experienced formation pilots, Pacific Flyer was told that in flying formation the trail pilot is essentially flying blind and, they argued, can t be blamed for whatever the lead pilot does.
Many cited the case of the Thunderbirds several years ago, when the lead flew into the ground, taking four wingmen with him.
Grondzik said he still can t understand why the FAA is after him.
This whole thing is beyond my comprehension, he said. I lay awake at night wondering how this could happen to me.
He reiterated that after the two planes landed and he heard that there might be a complaint, he asked the FAA s airshow monitor his opinion and he said that they had put on a good show ... that he had no problems with it at all.
The charges they face are serious; especially in Morrison s case as he is a professional pilot and could lose his job. If their ATPs are pulled, they d not only have to take all their tests again but would have a conviction of reckless and dangerous flying on their records.
Grondzik is 71 but Morrison is only in his 30s and that could end his career.
And in a strange subset to the story, airshow pilot John Collver had been named as a complainant even though he told Pacific Flyer he never made a complaint against the two.
I just stepped out of the can as they flew over, Collver said, and I thought, Wow, that was really cool. Then an FAA guy walked up to me and said, Did you see that? Well, of course I did and since I knew he was with the FAA, I couldn t lie and say I didn t see it.
He didn t even know he was listed as a complainant until Pacific Flyer called him, he said, and he emphasized that he never filed any form of complaint.
Grondzik also noted that he brought two airplanes to the show, his Skyraider and his T-28, flown by his daughter.
He has flown the show for seven years, he said, and only for the avgas it took although I never got back to base with as much gas as I left with.
Finally, I said I can t do this for free and asked for the minimum and they reluctantly paid me. This year they said no.
Then, he said, he found out AG1 was using his plane in promotional materials, without his permission or the permission of the photographer, who holds the copyright to the picture.
Nevertheless, he agreed to fly the show and he got a notice from AG1 saying that Midland (CAF headquarters) required that he put them on his insurance and that he pay the premium. Grondzik said he had no insurance and he wasn t go to pay for theirs.
Grondzik said he suspects that is why someone (he thinks he knows who) turned him in on what he believes is a false charge. We were unable to get anyone at the CAF to comment.
Griscom said as the matter now stands, he s still waiting for the FAA to agree to a meeting on the issue. If it goes to a trial, it will be before an NTSB administrative law judge who, Griscom said, has never ruled against the FAA.
An appeal would be to the judge s boss, the NTSB itself, and an appeal of that would be to a civil court, which usually upholds the NTSB. He was pessimistic about the situation and urged anyone who was at the show Sunday to contact him.
Robert Griscom, Esq
3750 John J. Montgomery Dr, Suite B
San Diego, CA 92123
858-560-8500 Phone
858-560-8501 Fax
bob@griscomaviationlaw.com
The best passes are never at airshows I'm sure Downwind will agree with me on that.
Nope! If the airfield is controlled and he is flying the prescribed pattern, there is no difference than him flying a circuit at his home airfield...This F-15 is obviously flying the 'closed pattern' at a relatively small gathering - but that still still constitutes an Air Display.
It funny, we were talking about his "problem" today. PM me and I could tell you more - my father in law was there....Skyraider Bob got in trouble earlier this year for something not even the same, but just close to the crowd.