![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fed: Planes flying in "commercial" airspace must get GPS | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 66 | June 4th 10 12:54 PM |
(USA) US/Mexico "airspace" (boundary) files available | Tuno | Soaring | 4 | March 27th 10 07:17 PM |
On Sharing airspace with "non-rated UAV "pilots" | vaughn | Piloting | 15 | March 15th 09 04:08 PM |
"Fly Baby, you violated Class B Airspace" | Ron Wanttaja | Piloting | 27 | September 5th 07 08:30 PM |
Aviation Conspiracy: Connecticut To Get "Creamed" By Airspace Redesign Change? | Free Speaker | General Aviation | 0 | August 8th 06 02:42 PM |