On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:31:46 -0500, "Icebound"
wrote:

It was a rhetorical question. The real question was:
Why would you want to fly for 3.5 hours at the edge of a condition which the
FARs state is only safe for 30 minutes or less? Since, technically, it
might not have been a violation if the altimeter setting was more than
29.92, I can see stretching it a bit... maybe 45 minutes or an hour. But
3.5???

Well, the way you initially phrased it was as a potential violation, which
it is not.

OTOH, there are many ways to be legal and not safe (as well as ways to be
safe but not legal). So, for me, anyway, I look at the two separately, and
I don't try to equate one with the other.

For example, flying for 3.5 at 12,500 is probably less safe than doing it
with oxygen. Especially for a sea level dweller who smokes 2 packs of
cigarettes/day. --Legal but not safe--

OTOH, someone who was born and bred and lived most all his life in
Leadville, CO, could probably fly with no problem (and no oxygen) at
13,000' all day long --Safe but not legal--




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)