Class A airspace

The differences between the two threads seems to be
that the UK
discussion was how can we maintain our access, to which
one of the
solutions was to ensure maximum posting of high flights
onto online
soaring sites (BGA Ladder) to provide gliding leadership
with
information to support the case for ongoing access.

In the US discussion, the tread seems to be mainly
about how to prevent
others posting good flights to online soaring sites
(OLC) when they
exceed 18000FT, because of competitive issues. A rather
different
approach. Both threads are full of those bureaucrats
who wish to
demonstrate nit-picking legalistic technicalities to
prevent safe and
enjoyable access to airspace in which glider pilots
should be free to
fly.

In the U.S. we have access to airspace, provided we
follow the rules. Your opinion that those who blatantly
disregard the rules are simply pushing the boundaries,
is hogwash.

There are two separate issues regarding violations
of
regulations in the U.S. One is the competative issue,
which means that giving credit for flights that intentionally
violate regulations is blatantly unfair to the vast
majority of the other pilots who comply with the regulations.
This also encourages those who are currently bending
to go a step further and just ignore them altogether.
The other issue is that we enjoy far better access
to airspace than most of the rest of the world. Showing
that we as a group will not tolerate pilots blatantly
violating rules is one of the few ways we have to show
the Fed's that the vast majority of us
are trying to self police ourselves. We do not need
renegades putting our current airspace availability
in jeopardy.
Not to mention the fact that posting flights on the
internet with your name, glider type and registration
number along with a flight log showing your violation,
is a pretty dumb thing to do.
If the Fed's ever start looking at these files as a
revenue stream of violations, it will give a whole
new meaning to the words 'nit picking'.

Can I hear an 'Amen' for brother Doug?

"Doug Haluza" wrote in message
ups.com...
However, as I said before, this public forum is not the place to
address these issues. You should not make public accusations against
named individuals without knowing all the facts.

Please use the partner check function in the OLC, or in the US you can
contact the SSA-OLC committee directly by email at olcatssadotorg.

Doug Haluza
SSA-OLC Admin

"Soarin Again" wrote in message
...
In the U.S. we have access to airspace, provided we
follow the rules. Your opinion that those who blatantly
disregard the rules are simply pushing the boundaries,
is hogwash.

You can't possibly know if it is 'hogwash' or not unless you have detailed
weather info and the results of their baro calibration. Talking to the
pilot before posting to this forum would not only be the gentlemanly thing
to do, it will also do more to protect our right to fly than your public
nitpicking possibly could.


There are two separate issues regarding violations
of
regulations in the U.S. One is the competative issue,
which means that giving credit for flights that intentionally

All that prize money and all those hot soaring groupies going to the wrong
pilots... The horror of it all.
It's true, I too got into sailplane racing for the money and the groupies,
but I stay with it just for the fun of it.

Not to mention the fact that posting flights on the
internet with your name, glider type and registration
number along with a flight log showing your violation,
is a pretty dumb thing to do.

So let me get this straight--you want to try to argue with someone who is
dumb? The result will be a meaningless victory or a doubly embarassing
defeat.

your handle "Soarin Again"
Please, go fly. Step back from the keyboard, please.

I'm in agreement with what you've quoted here. But I'm also in
agreement with jb92563 who said:
"I agree, anything 500' over a limit should not count and in fact
cause
letter from the locally responsible governing organization to
reprimand
any pilot that violates important airspace.

At least that shows to the FAA that we ARE governing ourselves. "

Ed

SAM 303a wrote:
Can I hear an 'Amen' for brother Doug?

"Doug Haluza" wrote in message
ups.com...
However, as I said before, this public forum is not the place to
address these issues. You should not make public accusations against
named individuals without knowing all the facts.

Please use the partner check function in the OLC, or in the US you can
contact the SSA-OLC committee directly by email at olcatssadotorg.

Doug Haluza
SSA-OLC Admin

flying_monkey wrote:

letter from the locally responsible governing
organization to reprimand any pilot that violates
important airspace.

Name some of the airspace you think is UNimportant?

At least that shows to the FAA that we ARE
governing ourselves. "

But you AREN'T governing yourself. That's what they do in UK and OZ and
(a little) NZ. YOU'RE governed by the FAA. Just like instructors in
172s and bizjets and 747 ATPs.

If you bust a rule, the FAA will come after the individual pilot. It's
a matter between him and the FAA. Airline pilots bust altitudes every
day but nobody blames it on the entire profession. It's an individual
and his own licence.

Group punishment is a very 1940s concept. I don't believe the FAA is
seriously into it - but you know your own country best.

All this self-policing angst sounds suspiciously like the expression of
some fairly common personality traits. How many of you are first
children?

GC

Graeme Cant wrote:

All this self-policing angst sounds suspiciously like the expression of
some fairly common personality traits.

It's become quite common over here, unfortunately: another aspect of the
feminization of America.


Jack

Graeme Cant wrote:
flying_monkey wrote:
At least that shows to the FAA that we ARE
governing ourselves. "

But you AREN'T governing yourself. That's what they do in UK and OZ and
(a little) NZ. YOU'RE governed by the FAA. Just like instructors in
172s and bizjets and 747 ATPs.

If you bust a rule, the FAA will come after the individual pilot. It's
a matter between him and the FAA. Airline pilots bust altitudes every
day but nobody blames it on the entire profession. It's an individual
and his own licence.

Group punishment is a very 1940s concept. I don't believe the FAA is
seriously into it - but you know your own country best.

This thorny thread has implications elsewhere in the U.S. (e.g., how to
treat contest flight records with apparent airspace violations, the
current answer being a huge penalty--i.e., negative score for the day).
I agree with those who urge caution before accusing someone without
having all the facts. I also agree there's risk in trying to act as an
enforcement mechanism when, in fact, we are not self governing.

There's greater risk, however, in doing nothing. Do not misunderstand.
I'm not advocating vigilante-style, do-it-yourself
denouncement/enforcement, particularly on RAS. Several years ago, I
actually had one self-described instrument of justice tell me in a
private email that he didn't care whether the facts supported his
loudly and frequently expressed views that a certain pilot was a crook:
he just KNEW he was right.

But as Doug Haluza has noted regarding the OLC, there are mechanisms
for reporting incidents that might be of concern to all of us. The
"Safety Box" at U.S. contests is another. A private word with the pilot
is yet another, if undertaken in the proper spirit.

With the advent of GPS flight recorders, the details of our flights are
now quite public. The OLC is just one way. Many U.S. national and
regional contests publish all flight traces. Other local and regional
season-long contests have Web sites where pilots post their logs, as do
local soaring clubs.

And if it's easy for us to run those records through SeeYou to check
for airspace infringement, don't think the Feds aren't doing it also. I
was on the grid at the U.S. Std. Class Nationals in Uvalde, TX a few
weeks ago when two gentlemen approached me asking for contest
headquarters. Turns out one of them had read a contest report on the
Internet about a minor problem with a towplane due to a maintenance
lapse and they had flown in to investigate...the following day. One of
them returned later and we chatted for quite a while. He was a nice,
extremely knowledgeable soaring enthusiast. He's owned at least three
high-performance gliders and currently flies a state-of-the-art
motorglider. He didn't seem like a steely-eyed, narrow-minded
bureaucrat obsessed with running errant pilots to ground and punishing
them for minor violations. For better or worse, his attitude was well
within the laissez-faire-to-vengeful-regulator spectrum displayed in
this thread. But with his Federal hat on, he was intent on finding out
what--and who--had gone wrong the previous day in a situation where
most of us would have just shaken our heads and rolled our eyes at the
mechanic's goof.

So I don't think it's inappropriate for any of us who spots what may be
a significant FAR violation to take some action. Whether that's
contacting the pilot in question or referring it to another
soaring-related entity, I frankly haven't gone through a disciplined
thought process. I suspect it would depend on the circumstances. For
what it's worth, I've done it once, and in a fashion that I think
neither threatened nor alienated the pilot in question.

The consequences of not taking action could be nothing...or very
severe. It's almost irrelevant whether the FAA is full of bureaucrats
who enjoy group punishment. They exist. There are also quite a few
enlightened people who don't get paid for exercising judgment and
giving us a break, but do so anyway. They're there at all levels. The
SSA, in particular, has worked very hard over the years to build
relationships with FAA officials to preserve the rights we have. While
the results aren't always widely publicized (trumpeting a big "win"
against the regulators is counterproductive), we've all benefited.

Yet, as I said, that's irrelevant. Should a glider encounter an
airliner or any other IFR aircraft above 18,000 (or in other controlled
airspace) with newsworthy consequences, we'll all be at the mercy not
just of reactionary FAA officials but of citizens' and industry trade
groups and--especially--politicians...who are VERY into group
punishment--especially if the group is too small to be politically
influential--if it will garner publicity, money, and/or votes. Read SSA
Executive Director Dennis Wright's column in the August SOARING about
the 1978 San Diego midair between a small plane and an airliner. Those
of us who lived through the subsequent NPRM 78-19 and threat to soaring
in this country will never forget the sense of outrage and incredulity
at the proposed airspace grab...that would have done nothing to address
the accident that sparked it.

So although I would suggest not airing it on RAS next time, don't sit
idly by if you see something that looks illegal any more than I hope
you wouldn't stay silent if you saw something dangerous. They're often
the same but something illegal--even if not apparently dangerous--can
have much more far-reaching consequences to all of us.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"

On 6/5/06 Peter Klose from the SFV Mannheim club
flying a Nimbus 3DM D-KTTT out of Parowan, Utah had
such a large error in his logger that he went to 19,180.



I don't quite understand...this guy posts the flight
for all to see on OLC and that is okay. Someone brings
up this flight on RAS...and this is not okay?

Perhaps the pilot somehow stayed under FL180 on that
flight, I would think an explanation with his upload
would be warranted. This idea that 'pushing the envelope'
in regards to the FAR's blows my mind. If a mid-air
occurs I doubt the public would buy it. I also agree
with Ramy...transponder usage would help with a much
larger issue. But that is for another flame-war.

This thread is about an important concept (playing by the rules) but
has twisted off into the realm of paranoia, with names and dates. Just
because someone didn't explain in the comments that they were cleared
above 17,999 feet, doesn't mean that they weren't cleared. Innocent
until proven guilty or something like that.

If I was to pass your car and trailer on the way to the airport, and
you were driving at the speed limit, would you:

A. Report me to the FAA.
B. Take my drivers license.
C. Remove my flight claim from the OLC.
D. Tell my mum.

From some posts in this thread, I'd assume all of the above. I'll never
get steak and kidney pie again.

How about reporting me to the IRS if you believe I'm not paying enough
tax?

It's far from a good idea to intentionally break the rules, but it's
a much worse idea for private individuals to play traffic cop.

A phrase that got me in trouble before...
Remember when the OLC was FUN?

Jim

"JS" wrote in message
oups.com...
A phrase that got me in trouble before...
Remember when the OLC was FUN?

And sex was safe???

KC