Minimum Safe Altitude

Yeah, I remember back in 1988 seeing on TV the airshow at Ramstein
where the Italian aerobatic team had a mid-air. It injured over 400
people and killed 70. Airshow regulations were changed to better
protect the audience.

That's the point here - learn from this tragic accident, recognize
there was a problem with the "show" as it was being conducted, and
change things so people don't get hurt or killed in the future.

-John

On Feb 11, 2:16 pm, Stefan wrote:
Ever seen an airshow?

At 19:18 11 February 2007, Stefan wrote:
Stewart Kissel schrieb:
The logic here still escapes me....soaring contest
organizers are to ask the FAA for a waiver...so that
an activity that the vast majority of pilots do not
choose to do, and consider unsafe...will be permitted?

Ever seen an airshow?

Many, and the proffesional well trained, checked and
authorised pilots who fly in them. The rules for a
display pilot, in the UK at least require a standard
of airmanship that is verifiable. Every display pilot
has a minimum level to which he is cleared, only the
best of the best get cleared to the lowest level.

At 19:18 11 February 2007, Stefan wrote:
Stewart Kissel schrieb:
The logic here still escapes me....soaring contest
organizers are to ask the FAA for a waiver...so that
an activity that the vast majority of pilots do not
choose to do, and consider unsafe...will be permitted?

Ever seen an airshow?


OH, you mean where pilots are trained and pass tests
before being allowed to make aerobatic manuevers.
Where pilots may not be fatigued and dehydrated from
tough 5 hour cross country flight. Where workers on
the field delineate safe areas for the public to stand.
Where airplanes are sequenced into airspace, rather
then screaming in on final glider from all directions?

Where airshow pilots *may* participate in regular physical
fitness programs to improve their stamina? Where the
purpose of the airshow is aerobatic manuevers, not
cross country competition with the need for high-g
pull up at the end.

Yes, I have seen several of these. Are you stating
we should categorize cross country soaring competitions
as 'air shows'?

Low passes look and sound cool...in an uncontrolled
environment conducted by fatigued pilots, who are also
going to immediately enter into the most dangerous
part of the flight(landing)...I don't see your analogy
fitting.

Maybe we should have the airshow pilots fly arond in
the sun for 5 hours before starting their routines?

Do glider aerobatic competitions start by first fatiguing
the pilots?

On Feb 11, 2:40�pm, Stewart Kissel
wrote:
At 19:18 11 February 2007, Stefan wrote:

Stewart Kissel schrieb:
The logic here still escapes me....soaring contest
organizers are to ask the FAA for a waiver...so that
an activity that the vast majority of pilots do not
choose to do, and consider unsafe...will be permitted?

Ever seen an airshow?

OH, you mean where pilots are trained and pass tests
before being allowed to make aerobatic manuevers.
*Where pilots may not be fatigued and dehydrated from
tough 5 hour cross country flight. *Where workers on
the field delineate safe areas for the public to stand.
*Where airplanes are sequenced into airspace, rather
then screaming in on final glider from all directions?

Where airshow pilots *may* participate in regular physical
fitness programs to improve their stamina? *Where the
purpose of the airshow is aerobatic manuevers, not
cross country competition with the need for high-g
pull up at the end.

Yes, I have seen several of these. *Are you stating
we should categorize cross country soaring competitions
as 'air shows'?

Low passes look and sound cool...in an uncontrolled
environment conducted by fatigued pilots, who are also
going to immediately enter into the most dangerous
part of the flight(landing)...I don't see your analogy
fitting.

Maybe we should have the airshow pilots fly arond in
the sun for 5 hours before starting their routines?

Do glider aerobatic competitions start by first fatiguing
the pilots?
Respectfully:
Why don't you guys put pink skirts around your glider and have an old
lady contest. You're just killing the fun. You all preach a good line
with perhaps 1000' setback for launches next, bubble wrap to follow so
that everyone's tush don't get scratch. After the contest you'll drive
with your girlie glider down the highway at 80 mph with total
disregard for the mother and her twins coming the other way.
Those who want guarantees, stay home and wait, for death will arrive.
More NASCAR fans die every year sitting in the stands than all the
world combined from "Maximum Performance Finishes", EVER!!
As tragic as the accident in UK was, the facts and statistics do not
support a change in finish height. Ya, I know, say that to the widow,
but one "specific type" accident over a defined time line determines
trends, which in this case , there is none. The vast majority feel
that MPFs are an important part of competition racing and all should
maintain a watch to assure that they're done by everyone, safely.
R

At 00:06 12 February 2007, wrote:

Respectfully:
Why don't you guys put pink skirts around your glider
and have an old
lady contest. You're just killing the fun.

Aha, the 'real men use contest finishes' argument.
I was waiting for that one. Why not break out the
calipers and measuring tape before hand so a certain
appendage can be accurately measured for every pilot?



Those who want guarantees, stay home and wait, for
death will arrive.
More NASCAR fans die every year sitting in the stands
than all the
world combined from 'Maximum Performance Finishes',
EVER!!

OK, what is the point there?....sailplane racing involves
less then 5% of a very small group to start with.
No doubt more people die from bee stings then low finishes
also. A fatality now and again because of low finishes
is acceptable because....why?

As tragic as the accident in UK was, the facts and
statistics do not
support a change in finish height.
Meaning if the glider was 50' higher, the same fatality
would have occured?

The vast majority feel
that MPFs are an important part of competition racing
and all should
maintain a watch to assure that they're done by everyone,
safely.

The vast majority of whom? The 5% who race? What
about the vast majority of Cessna 172 pilots who would
like to buzz their home towns under 50'? Or the vast
majority of skiers who would like to ski on crowded
groomed runs at 80mph?

Your argument holds the logic of....we don't care if
someone gets killed...because this is how we want to
operate. I still did not see your response to how
insurance companies will pay out when pilots knowingly
bust FAR's...or is that not relevant to your need to
be flying low?
R


Sailplane racing does not get a pass on safety issues
from the rest of the sport....are low passes okay for
training new students? Are low passes okay when giving
rides? Are low passes okay when completing long tasks?
How about low inverted passes?

Ya, I know, say that to the widow,
but one 'specific type' accident over a defined time
line determines
trends, which in this case , there is none.


So the space shuttle only having problems with O-rings
on one occasion is not a trend? First you guys use
the argument that these are inherily safe, then when
something like this happens....the agument becomes
it is the fault of the spectator or pilot.

Flying 5' above the ground outside of an airport is
stupid, true or false?

Would this tragic fatality have occured if using the US contest finish
line rules? No. Stop pooping on the US rules. The straight in finish
to landing (popular in World level and Grand Prix events) promotes
very low (grass top) finishes. Our rules prohibit that type of
flying. The Finish line is only used in National events, Regionals
should be using the Finish Cylinder. The finish line has a bottom of
50' and an unlimited top, is 3300' in length and is positioned well
away from people, vessels, vehicels and structures. When contest
organizers properly place the finish line it is perfectly legal to fly
down to 50' without any waiver from the FAA. If it is deemed that the
finish line is over an area other than "sparsely populated", the
bottom of the finish line should be placed at 500' or 1000' AGL as
appropriate, or the finish cylinder should be used in its place. If
Charlie and his van are the only congestion near the finish line, then
he should be avoided by at least 500' slant range, (no requirement to
be 500' AGL). There is no requirement to finish at 50', if 500' or
above is more your style, then save your Depends from the soiling and
finish high.

Everytime this topic comes up I am more amused. JJ says he will not enter a
contest that allows it, that is his right, and I applaud him. Every pilot
knows what he is comfortable with, and where his limits lie. Some people
should use those limits better, and all would be fine. As mentioned earlier,
NOTHING says you MUST finish at 50 feet and 140knots, so if you want to
whine about this subject, just finish high and let everyone else alone. Very
simple, and you still get no rude looks accross the table at the next glider
meet! Trust me, I have started a few subjects that it has happened to me,
right Henry!!!

Brian Glick

"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
Ya, I know, say that to the widow,
but one 'specific type' accident over a defined time
line determines
trends, which in this case , there is none.


So the space shuttle only having problems with O-rings
on one occasion is not a trend? First you guys use
the argument that these are inherily safe, then when
something like this happens....the agument becomes
it is the fault of the spectator or pilot.

Flying 5' above the ground outside of an airport is
stupid, true or false?

R wrote...........

but one 'specific type' accident over a defined time
line determines
trends, which in this case , there is none.

The US has had 10 finish gate accidents with 2 fatalities,
is that enough for a trend?


The vast majority feel
that MPFs are an important part of competition racing
and all should
maintain a watch to assure that they're done by everyone,
safely.
R

My point in all of this is; SSA sanctioned rules violate
FAR 91.119 and we are in a vulnerable position if we
have a UK type accident.

Kirk believes the AIM allows him to fly any pattern
he wishes. I'd like to listen in as he explains his
50 foot pattern to the Federallies. Let's see now,
you started your pattern at 50 feet, pulled up to a
tear-drop, down-wind and then landed the other way?
When they get through shaking their heads, they'll
read him the FAR about Minimum Safe Altitude, then
the FAR about Reckless Flying, then they'll lift his
ticket and well have one less cowboy ruining this sport
for the rest of us.
JJ

My point in all of this is; SSA sanctioned rules violate
FAR 91.119 and we are in a vulnerable position if we
have a UK type accident.

No they don't. Like anything else in life, common sense is required.
You have to place the finish line so that you either finish along a
runway, or away from people and property.

Kirk believes the AIM allows him to fly any pattern
he wishes. I'd like to listen in as he explains his
50 foot pattern to the Federallies. Let's see now,
you started your pattern at 50 feet, pulled up to a
tear-drop, down-wind and then landed the other way?
When they get through shaking their heads, they'll
read him the FAR about Minimum Safe Altitude, then
the FAR about Reckless Flying, then they'll lift his
ticket and well have one less cowboy ruining this sport
for the rest of us.
JJ

Again, your interpretation vs mine. I've already talked to some FAA
guys about it, and they agree with me. I'm sure you can find some
other ones who would violate me on the spot - in fact I know one here
in IL. Funny though, a circling approach at minimums is OK, though,
to these same guys. Guess it depends on what you are trained to do,
and who pays you salary.

There is a difference between hotdogging in the pattern and flying a
thought-out contest finish. And the FARs and AIM provide ample
guidance on what you can - and cannot - do in the pattern. I comply
with the regulations. You do not want to see it that way, so be it.
But it seems to me that I'm not the cowboy in this rodeo trying to
ruin this sport!

Unfortunately, it's becoming a moot point since the creeping
mediocrity of pilot-selected tasks and 500'/1 mile finishes after a 2
hour task seems to be taking over the sport. I guess my definition of
a "contest" is different from some others out there.

And a happy monday to you, too!

Kirk
66