Runway observer

A point here. If you end up appealing the local determination to the FAA
Director in Washington, include every conceivable argument with meticulous
detail. You will NOT be able to introduce any new evidence on appeal if the
Director upholds the local FAA office.

Allan

"Jim Culp" wrote in message
...
Wishing you all the best. These thoughts come to mind.


Approach - Logic, and Arguments to be offered:

Be there, professionally attired with clean haircuts
and make a clear, reasoned presentation with good demeanor.
Anger gets nothing and must be hidden.

Some more brainstorming possibilities (brainstorming =
vocalizing wild ideas without any critique of whether
they work in a particular instance)

At Dillingham, aerotows were generally with a tailwind.
Above about 10 knots, tows were cancelled because they
used a taildragger (a L-19 maybe?) and the owner had
concerns (there had been ground loops before).

The Southern Eagles site seems to show a trike (Cessna 175)
towing, so tailwinds might not be a concern as much.
And I don't know how strong or the direction of typical
glider weather winds (hence brainstorming).

Is it possible to take off from the runway intersection
the long way on the usually unused runway? Then land
in the other direction and always hold short? If
one treats this runway as a "one-way in, one-way out"
for gliders and tugs, would this work? Clearly there
are other factors that only local pilots would
know to critique this.

It seems that this solves the "intersecting traffic"
problem, and relieves the observer requirement.
Whether it works in other ways is unknown.

I noticed Allan mentioned the airport manager cannot
restrict landings. Absent from his comments were
whether an airport manager can restrict takeoffs.

Of course I believe Allan meant to say that the airport
manager cannot discriminate between classes of landing aircraft.
Certainly he can open or close runways at will (restrict landings).
If he despises gliders to the extent presented here,
I'd assume he'd get the Soaring Eagles to agree to use
the less popular runway, and then close it "indefinitely"
to fix the lights.

I'd ask the FAA what the plan is for your gliders if the
airport manager closes one of the runways.

The Airport Manager can not arbitrarily close any runway for landings or
takeoffs. Any certificated flying vehicle can NOT be prohibited from
operating at a public airport. The Airport would leave itself open to
severe liability problems if, for example, a transient aircraft (or glider)
was unable to land because of an arbitrary closing. In order to close a
runway for any reason, the Airport Management must issue NOTAMS in a timely
manner and have a valid (read safety) reason. Of course, in an emergency,
the Airport or runway can be closed, say because of a disabled aircraft on
the runway or at an intersection. It is in the best interests of Airport
Management to reopen the Airport as soon as possible.

At Dillingham, using an L19, experienced pilots are never prohibited from
obtaining a tow. If you have a tail wind on RWY 8 than there is no sense
going aloft for there is no ridge lift. Maybe you are talking about Mr.
Bills whose rules change like my wife's furniture. Try Soar Hawaii.

You other points are well taken.

I would fight this one to the bitter end if I were involved.

Allan


"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
...
Some more brainstorming possibilities (brainstorming =
vocalizing wild ideas without any critique of whether
they work in a particular instance)

At Dillingham, aerotows were generally with a tailwind.
Above about 10 knots, tows were cancelled because they
used a taildragger (a L-19 maybe?) and the owner had
concerns (there had been ground loops before).

The Southern Eagles site seems to show a trike (Cessna 175)
towing, so tailwinds might not be a concern as much.
And I don't know how strong or the direction of typical
glider weather winds (hence brainstorming).

Is it possible to take off from the runway intersection
the long way on the usually unused runway? Then land
in the other direction and always hold short? If
one treats this runway as a "one-way in, one-way out"
for gliders and tugs, would this work? Clearly there
are other factors that only local pilots would
know to critique this.

It seems that this solves the "intersecting traffic"
problem, and relieves the observer requirement.
Whether it works in other ways is unknown.

I noticed Allan mentioned the airport manager cannot
restrict landings. Absent from his comments were
whether an airport manager can restrict takeoffs.

Of course I believe Allan meant to say that the airport
manager cannot discriminate between classes of landing aircraft.
Certainly he can open or close runways at will (restrict landings).
If he despises gliders to the extent presented here,
I'd assume he'd get the Soaring Eagles to agree to use
the less popular runway, and then close it "indefinitely"
to fix the lights.

I'd ask the FAA what the plan is for your gliders if the
airport manager closes one of the runways.

If you have a tail wind on RWY 8 than there is no sense going
aloft for there is no ridge lift. Maybe you are talking about Mr.
Bills whose rules change like my wife's furniture.

There are other reasons to go aloft than to find ridge lift (or
any lift for that matter). Heck, I spent most of my training
circling in sink :P

The point here was that there are operations that take off with
a tailwind, and judgement rather than convention determines when
this is safe.

As far as "must have NOTAM" and "safety reasons," I recall
taking off out of Watsonville a few days before the airshow.
The crossing runway (26-8) had big white Xs and cones on it.
I called Norcal approach and asked about NOTAMS. None (just
like during my standard briefing). Well, I gave them a
PIREP instead...which also mentioned the several closed
taxiways...

If this airport manager really hates gliders that much, I'd
not be surprised if ground crews were "fixing" something
safety critical at inopportune times. Police motorcycle
training (temporary, only Saturdays 10-6) wouldn't be
much of a stretch either. My point was just to be careful
of sneakiness...

I certainly don't disagree with you. We would all agree that there is no
substitute for good judgment which , it appears,
the Airport in question does not seem to have.
Yes, they can be sneaky but that doesn't make them right.
I, of course, was being facetious about Hawaii.

Socrates argued that "Might makes right". Although he was really arguing
the opposite. Unfortunately, might does often prevail and right suffers.
Stupid and venal people have endless dilatory ways and can usually outlast
the best of us.

In any case, good luck to the beleaguered glider group. May they ultimately
prevail.

Allan




"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
...
If you have a tail wind on RWY 8 than there is no sense going
aloft for there is no ridge lift. Maybe you are talking about Mr.
Bills whose rules change like my wife's furniture.

There are other reasons to go aloft than to find ridge lift (or
any lift for that matter). Heck, I spent most of my training
circling in sink :P

The point here was that there are operations that take off with
a tailwind, and judgement rather than convention determines when
this is safe.

As far as "must have NOTAM" and "safety reasons," I recall
taking off out of Watsonville a few days before the airshow.
The crossing runway (26-8) had big white Xs and cones on it.
I called Norcal approach and asked about NOTAMS. None (just
like during my standard briefing). Well, I gave them a
PIREP instead...which also mentioned the several closed
taxiways...

If this airport manager really hates gliders that much, I'd
not be surprised if ground crews were "fixing" something
safety critical at inopportune times. Police motorcycle
training (temporary, only Saturdays 10-6) wouldn't be
much of a stretch either. My point was just to be careful
of sneakiness...

In article ,
"ADP" wrote:

I certainly don't disagree with you. We would all agree that there is no
substitute for good judgment which , it appears,
the Airport in question does not seem to have.
Yes, they can be sneaky but that doesn't make them right.
I, of course, was being facetious about Hawaii.

Socrates argued that "Might makes right". Although he was really arguing
the opposite. Unfortunately, might does often prevail and right suffers.
Stupid and venal people have endless dilatory ways and can usually outlast
the best of us.

In any case, good luck to the beleaguered glider group. May they ultimately
prevail.

Allan



Well said and thanks for the good wishes.

Actually, as has been posted before, we have, so far, won nearly every
issue in the conflict with our airport board and manager.
Professionalism and cool heads on the part of our club president and RJ
Cornay have prevailed. We still have some significant issues but we are
gaining ground. FAA reps visited weekend before last and watched our
operation during one of our local race weekends. We had a number of
visiting pilots and activity was high. Apparently, the FAA reps thought
well of our operation. Their observations should also help us in our
effort to remove one more of the harassment measures taken against us.
The airport board, on advice from the manager, passed a rule that
gliders must assemble in one of the busiest parts of the ramp rather
than the empty field beside our hangar 200 yards from any runway. This
was done purely to get us to inconvenience as many of the other airport
users as possible and to generate ill will towards the gliders. An FAA
rep looked at the situation with the gliders assembling on the ramp and
declared the rule "stupid".

As long as the people who are making the harassment rules are in power,
we will have to work hard for the right to use the airport. However, it
is possible that this particularly belligerent airport manager is
looking for an exit. Keep fingers crossed.

Fly safe.