Ascent Aviation Solutions Ordered To Pay Hefty Fines | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.23.22

Airborne-UnCrewed-05.24.22

Airborne-Unlimited-05.25.22

Airborne-Flt Training-05.26.22

Airborne Unlimited-05.20.22

Tue, Jul 06, 2021

Ascent Aviation Solutions Ordered To Pay Hefty Fines

Jury Finds Webster, TX, Aviation Biz Liable For Violating FARs

Ascent Aviation Solutions LLC and its owner have been ordered to pay nearly $240,000 in penalties for violating safety regulations, announced acting U.S. Attorney Jennifer B. Lowery.

Michael King had been operating the Webster-based company as a direct air carrier without the necessary FAA certification. A direct air carrier is one who provides, or offers to provide, air transportation and who maintains control over the operational functions performed in providing the transportation. In order to operate as a direct air carrier, one must hold an FAA-issued certificate after demonstrating they meet the requisite requirements.

The jury heard that Ascent used what is known in the industry as a “dry lease” to circumvent the FAA requirements for direct air carriers. Under such lease, the lessee simply leases the equipment and is responsible for all aspects of operational control of the plane.

Authorities learned of the illegal charter operation and checked one of the flights. At that time, they found evidence of a sham lease agreement between themselves and an unsuspecting third party.

That party did not have operational control of the plane. Testimony revealed he only paid Ascent to fly him from one city to another. The jury heard Ascent retained operational control of the aircraft meaning Ascent, not the passenger, handled all flight logistics including hiring the pilots.

Further investigation revealed King and Ascent had operated 14 unregulated charter flights which all had the potential to endanger public safety. The jury ultimately found King and his company liable for violating 14 FAA regulations, including one for the careless and reckless operation of a plane. They were ordered to pay $239,872.

The FAA conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ariel N. Wiley, Julie Redlinger and Keith Wyatt represented the United States during the proceedings. 

FMI: www.justice.gov, www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Airborne-Flight Training 05.26.22: Sonaca Halts, AMT School Regs, Sporty’s

Also: AEA Training Excellence Awards, Frontier Airlines & UND, Falcon 6x FFS, JSX Taps Skyborne Surprisingly; Sonaca Aircraft announced that it will cease production of its S20>[...]

Airborne-Flight Training 05.26.22: Sonaca Halts, AMT School Regs, Sporty’s

Also: AEA Training Excellence Awards, Frontier Airlines & UND, Falcon 6x FFS, JSX Taps Skyborne Surprisingly; Sonaca Aircraft announced that it will cease production of its S20>[...]

Indian Airline Pilots Shut Down Engine(s) Enroute

Airbus And Boeing Pilots Spice Things Up By Turning Off Engine In Flight In an interesting “turning off” of events, word on the airwaves is that in the past two months >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.24.22)

Aero Linx: International Federation Of Airworthiness We aim to be the most internationally respected independent authority on the subject of Airworthiness. IFA uniquely combines to>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.24.22): Compulsory Reporting Points

Compulsory Reporting Points Reporting points which must be reported to ATC. They are designated on aeronautical charts by solid triangles or filed in a flight plan as fixes selecte>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2022 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC