Back to Squawk list
  • 34

FAA suspends licenses of two pilots involved in failed Red Bull stunt

The Federal Aviation Administration revoked the licenses of two pilots for their "careless" and "reckless" conduct during a failed midair stunt last month in Arizona, officials said this week. ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

tlfys1 8
To bad the FAA can't do something to Red Bull for sponsoring this and the Drop Zone that allowed it to take place too.
sparkie624 5
That could be yet to come.... It was their planes that were used, and I doubt that they were listed as being stolen.
linbb -6
So you checked the N numbers and they are either leased to them or owned by them? Probably not.
sparkie624 6
They may have been leased. Being leased, it would still be classified as thiers. Airlines own very few planes, but they refer to it as their planes! Leased or not. You never see United say "Welcome abord our leased plane that we just got from Joes Leasing Company"!
There is a good chance that the planes were not owned by or leased to Red Bull, and that they merely had Red Bull signage on them due to sponsorship agreements with the pilots. That’s a very common situation in extreme sports.
sparkie624 2
Very good point... I did not think of that. I had assumed it would have been owned or leased by them for Insurance Purposes and libility issues. I can also imagine that RedBulls insurance premiums are due to rise!
If Red Bull didn't own the planes they would have had to indemnify the owners and cover any damages or losses.

I'm sure the overall cost of the project (salaries, equipment, site rental, planning, training etc.) significantly exceeds the value of the planes anyway. That's probably why they pushed ahead even after the FAA denied them -- they had so much invested and no marketable results to show for.
djames225 1
Red Bull Air Racing own/lease neither of those aircraft. Red Bull merely sponsored the events and the teams. It is up to each team to have qualified, non dumb a** pilots and get proper clearances.
These 2 should have their licence's ripped up and tossed forever.
sparkie624 1
They did have their licenses take away from them forever!
Love it. lol
Ed Kostiuk 8
Best news this week.
Lee Withers 5
Maybe I’m a little conservative, but why couldn’t they have “safety pilots” in each plane.? The actual stunt would be the same. Bloated egos lose again.
sparkie624 6
It would have added too much of a Safety factor to it... They wanted to be on the Edge and show the world that they knew what they were doing, but the world showed them otherwise!
Fewer people to risk having licenses revoked. ;)
royalbfh 2
Red Bull did violate the FARs these two cocky knuckle head pilots did. While I agree that Red Bull played a part as a sponsor the pilots chose to blatantly disregard the denial letter and without hesitation purposely and willfully violate the FARs. They destroyed a perfectly fine aircraft in the process and if it was insured will add to the ripple effect throughout the insurance underwriters. I personally think they should have their licenses revoked for this,
What a fast decision to said stunt. It took them longer to revoke the other YouTuber's license. Hopefully, others thinking of similar stunts will think twice about putting their licenses on the line by risking putting others and property in danger.
Ben Bosley 3
They asked the FAA for permission and they said no, so the FAA was already on notice
Torsten Hoff 3
The Trevor Jacob stunt required a bit of an investigation (though to most it was pretty obvious what had happened), whereas the Red Bull stunt was clear from the beginning -- it was deliberate, not sanctioned, and all the evidence was readily available.
sparkie624 1
Yes, but they still acted very quickly by comparison to the norm.
sparkie624 2
I bet the Next Red Bull Pilots will think twice before trying a similar stunt!
What other YouTuber's license?
sparkie624 3
Trevor Jacob Youtuber who crashed his own plane just to get YouTube Views!
Shenghao Han 1
They definitely disserved it.
But on the flip side FAA should just help them secure necessary safety margins.
WhiteKnight77 1
Why does the FAA need to help people with possibly deadly stunts?
ernest eiland -2
someone blab
roman fedotov -7
who cares that a bullshit government alphabet agency took away a piece of paper. They can still fly just fine
sparkie624 2
they cannot fly as Pilot In command... they can only fly with a Certified Flight Instructor. Your statement made no since. For them to continue flying would be equivalent or worse than driving a car without a drivers license. They may be able to still fly, but they will not be able to do so legal and if they get caught, there will be repercussions! Your statement alone is off in left field, and BTW, please watch your language! Some younger eyes maybe watching, and others don't want to see it.


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.