Farmer McNasty – Perris Area Balloon Jump

[Ron 10]

Quote

Well, what can I say, go take it up on a ballooning website and with the FAA.

The FAA is very clear on the subject. You have to have permission to land on private property UNLESS you have an emergency. When you PLAN on landing there, it is not an emergency.

Quote

In the pool case, you picked MY pool because we're discussing things on the web... you weren't a skydiver who just picked SOMEONE'S pool on the side of town nearest the DZ that you couldn't get back to.

I picked *A* pool. It just happened to be owned by YOU in my example. If I just randomly walked down the street and jumped into your pool since I could see it and was hot... That does not make it an emergency and does not make it legal.

Quote

Take a glider pilot to court, and you might have a lot tougher time suing him than if a power pilot just decided to land in your field for the heck of it. (I have no idea what might actually happen in trespass cases, civil or criminal, in different countries.)

In the US you land in someone's field and you will pay for damages EVEN if it is an emergency. If it is not an emergency then you can be charged with trespass. If you call ahead to your ground crew and have them meet you.... Then you have no excuse.

Quote

f a balloon takes off in a certain area, it might have a 95% chance of having to land on private property. When is it OK to launch? Below a 50% chance? 5%? Is the act of launching creating a false emergency?

That is up to the PIC and the FAA to decide. But when you plan on landing on private property and you do not have to land.... Then you cannot claim it is an emergency.

The rest of your questions are better asked of the FAA or the agency in your Country.

Quote

While a lot of ideas have been brought up in this thread, we really haven't been able to advance the argument very far. Recently it has pretty much been,
"Aviators sometimes land on private property".
"It's wrong to do that!"
"But that's what happens, and usually there are no consequences."
"It's wrong to do that!"
"But that's what happens."
"It's wrong to do that".
And so forth.

Nonsense. The law is pretty clear - You may not PLAN to land on private property without permission and expect to be protected under the emergency claim.It IS trespass and the property owner has every right to be upset. How YOU react when you break the law depends on how they act.

But the simple fact is that planning to land on private property without permission is illegal.

I have friends with private airports.... They have told me that I do not have permission to land on their fields. They have also said that they will not call the police or arrest me if I land there, even taking me to lunch.

But the fact is they have not given me permission, they just do not get upset when I do it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

Quote

It was a choice, just as a skydiver chooses one field over another, or a glider pilot figures it is time to start looking for a landing site in a given area and not another, and so on.

UP

That is the difference here... Balloons are able to go up and land somewhere further off, skydivers and gliders don't have the ability to create any useful lift.

That was a lot more concise than my reply. Thanks!

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[ridestrong 1]

Quote

@ those who are supporting the McNasty:

Well, how the heck are balloons & balloon companies supposed to operate?

Sometimes a ground crew can get out ahead and find the appropriate house to inquire about a particular field to land in... but I would guess that doesn't happen often.

Fundamentally there has to be some agreement whether all balloonists are evil and the practice of ballooning must be stopped, if they operate anywhere where there is private property, or whether it is "normal" for balloons to land on private property -- where they can do it as long as they pay for any minor damage caused.

Indeed, same goes for glider pilots, or *gasp* skydivers. What is a tolerable off-landing rate? No more than one jumper on a given person's private property per year, or else the DZ should be shut down? Otherwise someone is trying to make a profit off someone else's private property, because the DZ is too cheap to buy all the land within a mile of the airport.

I'm not advocating any particular answer. Just saying that generally, ballooning has been tolerated as an aerial activity, and they do need to land on others' property. If so, a landowner is allowed to be a little upset, but can't be able to dictate safety-of-flight issues.

Just finished the first page of this ridiculous flame fest.... thank goodness some reasonableness.

To the OP, I see this as a 'heads-up' for anyone doing a balloon ride or off site jump in the Perris area. While the land owner does have the right to be upset, he is seemingly being somewhat unreasonable.

One would hope that these events can continue with courtesy and understanding between all parties involved. Apologies and compensation should always be offered to any land owner if damages or inconvenience is occurred. Otherwise no need for anyone to be an asshole and everyone is happy.

*I am not afraid of dying... I am afraid of missing life.*
----Disclaimer: I don't know shit about skydiving.----

[humbled1 0]

Quote

Quote

@ those who are supporting the McNasty:

Well, how the heck are balloons & balloon companies supposed to operate?

Sometimes a ground crew can get out ahead and find the appropriate house to inquire about a particular field to land in... but I would guess that doesn't happen often.

Fundamentally there has to be some agreement whether all balloonists are evil and the practice of ballooning must be stopped, if they operate anywhere where there is private property, or whether it is "normal" for balloons to land on private property -- where they can do it as long as they pay for any minor damage caused.

Indeed, same goes for glider pilots, or *gasp* skydivers. What is a tolerable off-landing rate? No more than one jumper on a given person's private property per year, or else the DZ should be shut down? Otherwise someone is trying to make a profit off someone else's private property, because the DZ is too cheap to buy all the land within a mile of the airport.

I'm not advocating any particular answer. Just saying that generally, ballooning has been tolerated as an aerial activity, and they do need to land on others' property. If so, a landowner is allowed to be a little upset, but can't be able to dictate safety-of-flight issues.

Just finished the first page of this ridiculous flame fest.... thank goodness some reasonableness.

To the OP, I see this as a 'heads-up' for anyone doing a balloon ride or off site jump in the Perris area. While the land owner does have the right to be upset, he is seemingly being somewhat unreasonable.

One would hope that these events can continue with courtesy and understanding between all parties involved. Apologies and compensation should always be offered to any land owner if damages or inconvenience is occurred. Otherwise no need for anyone to be an asshole and everyone is happy.

How many balloons have landed on ur property? And just because the UK has no property rights does not doesn't mean we don't! I know this guy who got pissed and his version is quite different...

Has mister big mouth ever done a balloon jump at Perris?

"Tell ya the truth, I don't think this is a brains kind of operation."

[grimmie 186]

Balloon pilots in the Del Mar area of San Diego County have been sued and are involved in court action due to landing in "open areas".
Property owners tired of their land being trampled by the passenegers and balloon crews. Nothing worse than broken wine bottles and empty cheese tins in your flattened garden.

Back to Perris...