Racing airspace "violation" question

At 17:36 08 September 2010, Mike the Strike wrote:

This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown
from Tucson Soaring Club. The CD set a long and challenging task that
proved too long, mostly because of a late start. Only one contestant
completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me)
abandoned.

We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and
safest way home from tiger country.


And since no one is mentioned it yet, it is perfectly legal to overfly a
Class C without a transponder and without being in radio contact with the
tower, as long as you are above 10000 ft MSL. This is a fairly common
move in the western half of the US...

Marc

On Sep 8, 12:36*pm, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane
wrote:



On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote:

As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for
the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point
rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace
conflict with getting home.

Randy

What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going
around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course,
impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being
hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in
the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the
practical circumstance.

John Cochrane

This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown
from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that
proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant
completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me)
abandoned.

We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and
safest way home from tiger country.

Mike

I'm still trying to get a sense of whether "this was a real problem"
or whether this is some hypothetical question.

The SSA contest report says this was an area task from El Tiro to
Amado, southwest of Tucson, with a 25 mile circle around Amado. The
direct courseline to Amado doesn't intersect the Tucson class C,
though it does come close; the Tucson class C is east of courseline.
Looking at the chart, I would have flown the line of high ground even
further west of courseline, ending up at Keystone peak or thereabouts.
My options would have been the line of airports, Ruby Star, Flying
Diamond, Ryan, Taylor, all again a bit west of courseline and heading
right back to El Tiro and the second turnpoint. I just don't see how
anyone could have gotten stuck behind the Tucson class C. And it looks
like the CD did a good job of setting a course that really didn't
cause a problem.

So, tell the story. Where were you guys that you really felt this was
the only safe option? How did you get there? Or is this all
hypothetical?

There is a lot of complaining around here about rules being too
complicated. Carving out an exception for class C overflights in
abandoned tasks is certainly going to be complicated. So it matters
whether this is a real problem, or just the beginning of winter what-
ifs.

John Cochrane

I think QT is right, though it took some puzzling over the rules for
me to see it.

Actually, I think that having a mysterious flight log failure will not
get you out of trouble. A valid log has to show takeoff, path of
flight and landing (see below), and if there are any gaps, the cd is
supposed to assume you went real fast right to the prohibited space.
That says "path of flight and landing" not just "task."

Now should we change it? The event -- you abandon the task, want to
fly home, and the only way to do it safely is go over a class C, and
you have a radio and transponder -- seems pretty remote. Was it
really unsafe to go around, or was it just extra gas for a
motorglider?

10.5.2 Flight Log requirements
10.5.2.1 A valid Flight Log is one that:
• Was produced by a Flight Recorder that meets the provisions of Rule
6.7.4
• Shows the takeoff, the path of the flight, and the landing.
• Has a typical interval between fixes of 15 seconds or less.
• Between takeoff and landing, shows no interval between fixes
exceeding 15 minutes (See Rule 6.3.3.2 for motorized sailplanes
constraint).

10.12.5 Gaps in a Flight Log longer than one minute shall be
interpreted unfavorably to the pilot. During each such gap:
• the closest horizontal approach to or from the nearest closed
airspace shall be calculated assuming a speed of 100 mph
• if in the judgment of the CD there was any realistic possibility of
a vertical airspace violation, the closest vertical approach to the
nearest closed airspace shall be calculated based on a climb rate of
1000 feet per minute


John Cochrane

On Sep 7, 8:01*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:
I think QT is right, though it took some puzzling over the rules for
me to see it.

Actually, I think that having a mysterious flight log failure will not
get you out of trouble. A valid log has to show takeoff, path of
flight and landing (see below), and if there are any gaps, the cd is
supposed to assume you went real fast right to the prohibited space.
That says "path of flight and landing" not just "task."

Now should we change it? The event -- you abandon the task, want to
fly home, and the only way to do it safely is go over a class C, and
you have a radio and transponder -- seems pretty remote. *Was it
really unsafe to go around, or was it just extra gas for a
motorglider?

10.5.2 Flight Log requirements
10.5.2.1 A valid Flight Log is one that:
• Was produced by a Flight Recorder that meets the provisions of Rule
6.7.4
• Shows the takeoff, the path of the flight, and the landing.
• Has a typical interval between fixes of 15 seconds or less.
• Between takeoff and landing, shows no interval between fixes
exceeding 15 minutes (See Rule 6.3.3.2 for motorized sailplanes
constraint).

10.12.5 Gaps in a Flight Log longer than one minute shall be
interpreted unfavorably to the pilot. During each such gap:
• the closest horizontal approach to or from the nearest closed
airspace shall be calculated assuming a speed of 100 mph
• if in the judgment of the CD there was any realistic possibility of
a vertical airspace violation, the closest vertical approach to the
nearest closed airspace shall be calculated based on a climb rate of
1000 feet per minute

John Cochrane

On Sep 7, 8:01*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:

• if in the judgment of the CD there was any realistic possibility of
a vertical airspace violation, the closest vertical approach to the
nearest closed airspace shall be calculated based on a climb rate of
1000 feet per minute

I missed this one.

Does that mean that you could get a penalty if you get within
1,000*(sample interval in seconds)/60 of 17,500', and if you drop
fixes you are at risk for a penalty if you are within (# dropped
fixes)*1,000*(sample interval in seconds)/60 of 17,500'. Is there also
a decent rate calculation to get you back down to your next fix?

There must be some threshold that determines "realistic possibility".

9B