Ads-b and sailplanes

There was is Nothing wrong with the language, it is the same as for the transponder requirement.
Within the 30nm arc defining the mode c veil, if the ceiling of the associated class b is 9000msl, you cannot climb above 9000 without the proper equipment.
If the class b goes to 10,000msl, no problem, climb as high as you like to 17,999.

You cannont fly over the top of Class B or Class C below 10,000 MSL. TFR the Class C tops out at 5,000, you cannot fly between 5,000 and 10,000 without equipment. Above 10,000 to 17,999 is fair game.

BillT

On Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 11:11:33 PM UTC-4, Bill T wrote:
There was is Nothing wrong with the language, it is the same as for the transponder requirement.
Within the 30nm arc defining the mode c veil, if the ceiling of the associated class b is 9000msl, you cannot climb above 9000 without the proper equipment.
If the class b goes to 10,000msl, no problem, climb as high as you like to 17,999.

You cannont fly over the top of Class B or Class C below 10,000 MSL. TFR the Class C tops out at 5,000, you cannot fly between 5,000 and 10,000 without equipment. Above 10,000 to 17,999 is fair game.

BillT

Bill,

They might have wanted it to be the same as the transponder, but they used different language. The only way I can parse the FAR is that there is no exemption above 10,000 MSL.

Todd
3S

It's all in there, 91.225. Concentrate on (d)(2) and (d)(4) and (e).
(e) is your (d)(4) exemption for above 10,000
(e)(1) and (e)(2) applies to the 30nm veil referenced in (d)(2)
Although it is not very clear.

BillT

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 11:26:53 PM UTC-4, Bill T wrote:
It's all in there, 91.225. Concentrate on (d)(2) and (d)(4) and (e).
(e) is your (d)(4) exemption for above 10,000
(e)(1) and (e)(2) applies to the 30nm veil referenced in (d)(2)
Although it is not very clear.

BillT

Where (e)2 apply is the problem. It's just not spelled out in the FAR.

Todd

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 9:26:53 PM UTC-6, Bill T wrote:
It's all in there, 91.225. Concentrate on (d)(2) and (d)(4) and (e).
(e) is your (d)(4) exemption for above 10,000
(e)(1) and (e)(2) applies to the 30nm veil referenced in (d)(2)
Although it is not very clear.

BillT

Yeah, frankly it is a mess. How can you tell from the language that (e)(1) and (e)(2) apply to (d)(2), but not (d)(4)? It says ALL operations authorized by this section.

But another real problem for many western operations is the (e)(2). If it is real, it means that gliders cannot operate above 10,000 feet within the veil without ADS-B OUT, even if clear of the lateral boundaries of the Cass B. This will affect a good number of us in the west.

On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 12:14:02 PM UTC-4, 2KA wrote:
On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 9:26:53 PM UTC-6, Bill T wrote:
It's all in there, 91.225. Concentrate on (d)(2) and (d)(4) and (e).
(e) is your (d)(4) exemption for above 10,000
(e)(1) and (e)(2) applies to the 30nm veil referenced in (d)(2)
Although it is not very clear.

BillT

Yeah, frankly it is a mess. How can you tell from the language that (e)(1) and (e)(2) apply to (d)(2), but not (d)(4)? It says ALL operations authorized by this section.

But another real problem for many western operations is the (e)(2). If it is real, it means that gliders cannot operate above 10,000 feet within the veil without ADS-B OUT, even if clear of the lateral boundaries of the Cass B. This will affect a good number of us in the west.

It's pretty clear that the intent of the rule is to permit gliders to operate above 10K ft without ADS-B OUT. By the time 2020 rolls around this might be a moot discussion. Hopefully, we'll have some very affordable gear by then so the main obstacle for voluntary equipage will go away.

The 30 nm Mode C Veil does not exist above 10,000 MSL.