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-07.14.25

Airborne-NextGen-07.15.25

AirborneUnlimited-07.16.25

Airborne-FlightTraining-07.10.25

AirborneUnlimited-07.11.25

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

ANN FAQ: How Do I Become A News Spy?

We're Everywhere... Thanks To You! Even with the vast resources and incredibly far-reaching scope of the Aero-News Network, every now and then a story that should be reported on sl>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: The PB4Y-2 Privateer - A Priceless Aero-Treasure

From 2015 (YouTube Version): Oshkosh Reveals Many Treasures... Including Old Warbirds Full Of History While at EAA AirVenture 2015, ANN News Editor, Tom Patton, ventured out to vis>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (07.14.25)

"The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (07.14.25): Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR)

Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) A TFR is a regulatory action issued by the FAA via the U.S. NOTAM System, under the authority of United States Code, Title 49. TFRs are issued wi>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (07.14.25)

Aero Linx: Aviation Without Borders Aviation Without Borders, a leading humanitarian aviation charity, uses its aviation expertise, contacts and partnerships to enable support for >[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC