![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the interpretation
of the FAR's is correct - that busting 500' is, without exception, a violation in any circumstance other than final approach to landing. It is not clear to me that this is necessarily the case, or enforced that way by the FAA, but put that aside for now. If we are going to abide by the letter of the law on FARs, then busting 500' agl ANYWHERE on course should be grounds for penalty. This could be DQ for the day, scoring as if you landed at the spot where the infraction occurred, or whatever is consistent with other FAR violations under contest rules. I believe this would include low saves as well as ridgeline crossings and ridge soaring, etc. In other words, we would need to enforce a 500' agl hard deck in the scoring programs, which would need to include an accurate terrain elevation database. I suspect this is technically not that hard to do since programs like SeeYou already have it. Before going down that path, however, I would want to see a definitive statement from official FAA sources that this is in fact the correct interpretation of the FARs AND that the FAA intends to enforce these FARs to the letter of the law, rather than only in those instances that show some form of recklessness beyond the technicalities alone. It would be a pity in my view if this happened as I really like mountain flying and ridge soaring. 9B At 19:00 03 October 2003, George William Peter Reinhart wrote: JJ, You have a very good point. Why not handle violations of the FAR's same way as busting 18K? No score for the day (or maybe DSQ for the contest). Rules violations used to be handled that way at the sailboat races in times before political correctness was so much the vogue. Cheers!, Pete JJ Sinclair wrote in article ... I flew the 111 at Mountain Home ('72-'74) We have established that the 50 foot gate VIOLATES the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? We have established that some pull-ups VIOLATE the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? We have established that finishing over people, VIOLATES the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? JJ Sinclair |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here is what the local FAA Saftey inspector from the FSDO told me less
than a month ago. "Just about everyone likes to do a low pass once in a while. I have even done one in a my Aeronca champ, but no one noticed. The FAR's say 500 feet from any man made object, except for takeoff and landing. Precedince is a fence post is a man made object. However an occasional low pass safely done over a runway will usually not get the FAA's attention. However repeated low passes will result in a visit from you local FAA inspector and possible certificate action" That is right from the FAA and perhaps not word for word but you get the idea. It may be interpreted differently at different FSDO's. But it seems to mee that our FSDO has a very common sense approach to this subject. Brian Case CFIIG/ASEL Andy Blackburn wrote in message ... Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the interpretation of the FAR's is correct - that busting 500' is, without exception, a violation in any circumstance other than final approach to landing. It is not clear to me that this is necessarily the case, or enforced that way by the FAA, but put that aside for now. If we are going to abide by the letter of the law on FARs, then busting 500' agl ANYWHERE on course should be grounds for penalty. This could be DQ for the day, scoring as if you landed at the spot where the infraction occurred, or whatever is consistent with other FAR violations under contest rules. I believe this would include low saves as well as ridgeline crossings and ridge soaring, etc. In other words, we would need to enforce a 500' agl hard deck in the scoring programs, which would need to include an accurate terrain elevation database. I suspect this is technically not that hard to do since programs like SeeYou already have it. Before going down that path, however, I would want to see a definitive statement from official FAA sources that this is in fact the correct interpretation of the FARs AND that the FAA intends to enforce these FARs to the letter of the law, rather than only in those instances that show some form of recklessness beyond the technicalities alone. It would be a pity in my view if this happened as I really like mountain flying and ridge soaring. 9B At 19:00 03 October 2003, George William Peter Reinhart wrote: JJ, You have a very good point. Why not handle violations of the FAR's same way as busting 18K? No score for the day (or maybe DSQ for the contest). Rules violations used to be handled that way at the sailboat races in times before political correctness was so much the vogue. Cheers!, Pete JJ Sinclair wrote in article ... I flew the 111 at Mountain Home ('72-'74) We have established that the 50 foot gate VIOLATES the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? We have established that some pull-ups VIOLATE the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? We have established that finishing over people, VIOLATES the FAR's, So what are we going to do about that? JJ Sinclair |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Landing and T/O distances (Was Cold War ALternate Basing) | Guy Alcala | Military Aviation | 3 | August 13th 04 12:18 PM |
Va and turbulent air penetration speed. | Doug | Instrument Flight Rules | 70 | January 11th 04 08:35 PM |
Jet fighter top speed at military power | David L. Pulver | Military Aviation | 18 | December 1st 03 07:13 PM |
Angle of climb at Vx and glide angle when "overweight": five questions | Koopas Ly | Piloting | 16 | November 29th 03 10:01 PM |
New Film: The Need For Speed - Going to war on drugs | Phil Carpenter | Military Aviation | 0 | July 23rd 03 07:43 AM |