It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FAA Loses Track of 132,000 Aircrafts

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

FAA Loses Track of 132,000 Aircrafts


liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com

There are 357,000 private and commercial aircraft in the U.S., including small planes, private jets, big airliners and cargo planes. The Federal Aviation Administration has revealed a third of those aircraft have "questionable registration," meaning the government is no longer sure who owns them. That's going to change, but it's going to take three years.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.huffingtonpost.com
abcnews.go.com




posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
So what's going on here?

Astounding amounts spent on body scanners, borderline sexual assault if you try to get on a commercial airliner, meanwhile the FAA isn't sure who owns a lot of the small hardware out there.

The Huffington Post has an interesting take on this though, calling it "today's fake terror threat".



liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 10-12-2010 by whatisanameanyway because: Linkage.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by whatisanameanyway
 


You really can't "lose track" of the ownership records for aircraft which were never properly registered in the first place. The matter becomes murky and takes time to reslove when the question is asked decades after the planes are in service.... of course, I would have expected 'sales records' for such comodities as aircriaft to be fairly straightforward. Find the manufacturer, query them about the VIN (or whatever is stamped on the product) and who bought it... but I suppose there are many ways to foil that tactic... like the manufacturer bieing sold 10 times over the years, the airlines doing the same, and the fact that the FAA is manned by .... oh well... you all know.

I wonder if a large portion of the aircraft in question belong (via circuitous fronts) to the CIA....



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I believe a large majority of aircraft are owned through "circuitous" fronts!

It isn't so much that they don't know who the owner of record is, but they don't know who the owner of the owner of record is. The registrations of these aircraft are often times a laundry list of corporate names that each have additional partners and shareholders that are also "asset protected" through shell corporations and trusts.

A typical "King Air" might be owned by a partnership of three or four investment firms and then leased to another partnership of three or four investment firms and then managed by a professional air firm that is owned by a partnership of three or four investment firms. On top of that, each investment firm is owned by a collaboration of many individuals and corporations that each protect themselves through LLC, Corps, and Trusts.

You can see how it would be virtually impossible to find out who "owns" a particular airplane.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatisanameanyway

So what's going on here?

Astounding amounts spent on body scanners, borderline sexual assault if you try to get on a commercial airliner, meanwhile the FAA isn't sure who owns a lot of the small hardware out there.

The Huffington Post has an interesting take on this though, calling it "today's fake terror threat".



liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 10-12-2010 by whatisanameanyway because: Linkage.



Agreed



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by whatisanameanyway
 


I think some perspective is in order. The media either blows things up (or people see the stories, and blow them up in their heads?).

Guess my post from another thread bears some relevance, for clarity on the situation (and facts):


Some people (and often, in media) simply do NOT understand what they're talking about.

This is only about the FAA's poor record-keeping of airplane REGISTRATION Certificates! In most cases, involving airplanes privately owned...SMALL ones....(well, airCRAFT...since can include light-than-air, gliders, helicopters, blimps, and even some small sport-type powered paragliders.....ANYTHING that flies, and falls in the category of requirement for FAA Registration)!!!

www.faa.gov...

Article from JULY, 2010:

www.wilmerhale.com...

Article from MAY, 2010:

www.mondaq.com...

MORE (factual, not hyperbole) info:


Background

Information on the U.S. Civil Aircraft Register, a database maintained by the Aircraft Registration Branch of the FAA, is used to communicate safety-related information to aircraft owners, for law enforcement purposes, in connection with investigations of accidents or incidents and to identify aircraft, when necessary, for use by the U.S. armed forces. It also serves as a resource for individuals, banks, and other institutions involved with financing aircraft purchases. The FAA is charged with recording in the database each aircraft's registration number ("N-number"), complete description, and registered owner's name and address.

Aircraft records are created when owners of U.S.-registered aircraft file an Aircraft Registration Application (AC Form 8050-1) at the time title to the aircraft transfers to them. Once the FAA processes the application, the agency sends the owner an Aircraft Certificate of Registration (AC Form 8050-3, also known as a "Hard Card") to be carried onboard the aircraft. Hard Cards typically had no expiration date and remained valid until the FAA learned that ownership information changed, or the agency otherwise determined that an event occurred requiring revocation of the registration. A Hard Card, together with an airworthiness certificate (FAA form 8100-2 ), is essential for a U.S.-registered aircraft to operate legally in U.S. and foreign airspace.

Since at least 1980, owners of U.S.-registered aircraft have been required to self-report events that affected the information contained in the Register (e.g., the sale or destruction of their aircraft, a change in the owner's mailing address or name, etc.). While a failure to file such reports formally subjected the relevant aircraft's registration certificate to revocation, in practice, the FAA relied on owners to comply voluntarily with the update requirements and rarely investigated cases where information appeared to be inaccurate. Even when owners clearly failed to update registration details, the agency did not purge the records from its system to ensure that a new active aircraft would not be assigned an N-number still used by an aircraft being flown with a revoked registration. Rather, when an aircraft record appeared to be inaccurate, the FAA typically identified it as "questionable" and continued to maintain it in the database.
www.jonesday.com...


This has absolutely nothing, ZERO, to do with the mistaking of a jet contrail off the coast of California last month, and confusing it with a so-called "missile trail"!

This is the kind of irrelevant speculation that is ruining the seeking of logical and reasonable discourse...both in real life, on the Internet, and especially on ATS!

Also, for those who may not know (but every pilot does) there are two documents that MUST be onboard an aircraft, when it is being operated: The current (valid) Registration form, and the current Airworthiness Certificate. IN addition, if the aircraft has a radio transceiver (for communications) then it must have an FCC Radiotelephone Permit as well.

These items must be prominently displayed somewhere, usually in the cockpit, of very near by. You may ask to see them on the next airliner you fly on, if you wish. They used to be on the inside of the cockpit doors....but, with new "hardened" and secure doors, they are usually now mounted on the bulkhead, somewhere just inside the door.


BTW...any "CIA" registered airplanes? Not an issue, really....are they? It's like worrying about all of the cars, turcks boats, etc that CIA (or any other goverment agency) may own and operate.

THIS story, as it's been hyped (in media outlets) is suggesting (fear mongering) a possible "window of opportunity" for some sort of "terrorist" action. Ah, fear. Mongered. Well done, Fox "news".....



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
FAA Loses Track of 132,000 Aircrafts -

That's what I'm sayin'. That's what I'm tryin' to tell ya'.

And they immediately KNEW that whatever went up off the California coast a while back was just a jet. There's still no definitive answer forthcoming. If they can't even keep track of a few private planes, how can we believe that they knew what the deuce went up like a missile? Hmm?

-PS

ABC
A - Always
B - Be
C - Closing

Always be closing. Always be closing.

edit on 12/10/2010 by this_is_who_we_are because: typo




top topics



 
5

log in

join