![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
It states witnesses testified that the ceiling was 100 to 200 feet, and that the respondent admitted there were clouds at 200 feet. Well, that means that the bases were at 100 to 200 feet. The tops were not stated in the ruling. So he was at best 500 feet away from clouds upon entering Class E airspace, and most likely much less. What I find most curious about this incident is that the pilot was found not to be in violation of FAR 91.155(a) when his own statement obviously indicates that he was. My guess at this is that the violation of cloud clearances is hard to prove in court and that it is a small violation that the FAA gave up on. They wanted to get him for being careless and reckless. That was their main purpose, and they weren't interested in a piddly little charge getting in the way. Its a bit like my driving analogy from a few posts ago about running a red light. If you were speeding by 5 mph when you ran a red light that charge would be secondary and likely not even bothered with or dropped. So the charge was let go (you'd have to go into the original proceedings to figure out exactly how and why). But, yes, he did violate FAR 91.155, and if the FAA wanted to spend resources on it they probably could have convinced the Judge to agree. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... Well, that means that the bases were at 100 to 200 feet. The tops were not stated in the ruling. So he was at best 500 feet away from clouds upon entering Class E airspace, and most likely much less. I took the witnesses' statement to mean the cloud layer was 100 feet thick, 100 to 200 AGL. That fits with the respondent's statement that there were clouds at 200 feet and he was in VFR conditions well before he reached controlled airspace at 700 feet. The actual altitude and thickness of the cloud layer really doesn't matter. If the floor of controlled airspace is at 700 AGL and there's a solid cloud layer between the surface and the start of controlled airspace, then it's impossible to climb through that layer and be in VFR conditions when you reach controlled airspace. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Legal question | PMA | Home Built | 9 | January 14th 05 03:52 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Home Built | 3 | May 14th 04 11:55 AM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | May 11th 04 10:43 PM |
Database update at Landings | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Home Built | 0 | May 11th 04 10:25 PM |