Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
reporting points, etc.) Thanks.

M

Mike wrote:
>
> Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
> transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
> requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
> like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
> 500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
> on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
> reporting points, etc.) Thanks.

Do not get below 500' in that area -- with the amount of boat traffic in the harbor,
you will find it impossible to maintain the required clearance. In addition, the 500'
ASL level will contain quite a few helicopters, so I would not venture below 600' in
any aircraft that has less than excellent visibility. Why do you think you need to
get that low?

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

>
>Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
>transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
>requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
>like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
>500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
>on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
>reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
>


I'm not so sure about transponder-less a/c inside the 30 nm ring. I would
check on that.

But, if so, the frequency is 123.05 on the Hudson River. Self-announce
position, stay right (as a highway).
www.Rosspilot.com

You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder. However, I think you can
get a special permission from FSDO to enter or leave without transponder
for good reasons. I dont think they will give you a permission because you
want to fly into that corridor without a transponder.

Toks Desalu
Dyin' to soar
PP-ASEL


"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
> >transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
> >requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
> >like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
> >500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
> >on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
> >reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
> >
>
>
> I'm not so sure about transponder-less a/c inside the 30 nm ring. I would
> check on that.
>
> But, if so, the frequency is 123.05 on the Hudson River. Self-announce
> position, stay right (as a highway).
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>

"Toks Desalu" > wrote in message
...
>
> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder.
>

You can in an airplane that has never had an engine-driven electrical
system.

Toks Desalu wrote:
>
> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder. However, I think you can
> get a special permission from FSDO to enter or leave without transponder
> for good reasons. I dont think they will give you a permission because you
> want to fly into that corridor without a transponder.

You get it from TRACON if your aircraft has an electrical system. The reason can be
as simple as "I want to fly through there on my way to xxx". Getting permission to
actually enter the class-B is another kettle of fish, but I've heard of it being
arranged.

As far as aircraft without electrical systems goes, FAR 91.215 states in part --
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(2) of this section, any aircraft which was not
originally certificated with an engine-driven electrical system or which has not
subsequently been certified with such a system installed, balloon or glider may
conduct operations in the airspace within 30 nautical miles of an airport listed
in appendix D, section 1 of this part provided such operations are conducted -;

(i) Outside any Class A, Class B, or Class C airspace area; and

(ii) Below the altitude of the ceiling of a Class B or Class C airspace area
designated for an airport or 10,000 feet MSL, whichever is lower; and

Despite that last "and", there is no part iii in the copy of the FARs on the AOPA web
site.

As I read that, he can run the corridor if he wants to. That's outside the class B
airspace.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Toks Desalu wrote:

> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder....

This statement is incorrect. You need to review FAR 91.215, section b
(3). It states that the original request is legal (flight within the 30
mile Mode C veil, but NOT within the Class B), since the OP clearly
stated that the aircraft in question not only had no transponder, but no
electrical system.

This says nothing about the whether it's a good idea to fly NORDO within
the corridor - I'd be a bit hesitant. However, with a HANDHELD radio,
you'd be perfectly safe (at least as safe as everyone else) and
perfectly legal.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2004

"Marc J. Zeitlin" > wrote in message
news:jtuid.55136$R05.36410@attbi_s53...
> Toks Desalu wrote:
>
>> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder....
>
> This statement is incorrect. You need to review FAR 91.215, section b
> (3). It states that the original request is legal (flight within the 30
> mile Mode C veil, but NOT within the Class B), since the OP clearly
> stated that the aircraft in question not only had no transponder, but no
> electrical system.
>
> This says nothing about the whether it's a good idea to fly NORDO within
> the corridor - I'd be a bit hesitant. However, with a HANDHELD radio,
> you'd be perfectly safe (at least as safe as everyone else) and
> perfectly legal.
>

How does a handheld radio make you as safe as everyone else?

Steven P. McNicoll asks:

> How does a handheld radio make you as safe as everyone else?

Many folks (I'm not necessarily one of them) believe that being in radio
contact with other aircraft in a relatively confined airspace is a key
factor in the safety of all of those aircraft. With the handheld, the
aircraft without the electrical system can still be in radio contact.
If you believe that this is a factor in safety, then the radio will get
you functional equivalency with the other aircraft that have built in
radios running off of their electrical system, which the aircraft in
question doesn't have.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2004

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote:

>Do not get below 500' in that area -- with the amount of boat traffic in the harbor,
>you will find it impossible to maintain the required clearance. In addition, the 500'
>ASL level will contain quite a few helicopters, so I would not venture below 600' in
>any aircraft that has less than excellent visibility. Why do you think you need to
>get that low?

It's a bit diffficult to see, but my sectional appears to
say that the Class B is 70/+05 over the Lady. I know I'll
need an NY Terminal Chart, but I'm in the planning stages.
Is the CBAS higher than 500' there?

(Rosspilot) wrote:

>>Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
>>transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
>>requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
>>like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
>>500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
>>on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
>>reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
>
>I'm not so sure about transponder-less a/c inside the 30 nm ring. I would
>check on that.

I did check, that's why I said I met the 91.215 exception
req't.

"Toks Desalu" > wrote:

>You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder.

Yes I can. My plane has no electrical systema nd I'm exempt
as I said. I fly in the 30 nm veil all the time. This was
just an extreme case, so I thought I'd see if there was
anything I was missing.

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote:

>As I read that, he can run the corridor if he wants to. That's outside the class B
>airspace.

That's how I read it too. Anyone do this? Anyone have a
terminal chart and can verify that I'd have to go to 500' or
lower, or is there a sliver of 70/11 or higher east of the
Lady that I can't see?

"Marc J. Zeitlin" > wrote:

>This says nothing about the whether it's a good idea to fly NORDO within
>the corridor - I'd be a bit hesitant.

I'm not NORDO, just negative transponder so I can't get into
the Class B.

>I fly in the 30 nm veil all the time. This was
>just an extreme case, so I thought I'd see if there was
>anything I was missing.

What i was worried about was someone spotting me on primary
radar, not knowing the FAR's and thinking "No transponder,
30 nm veil, approaching 9-11 ground zero - call out the
F-16's" There's no way for anyone to tell from radar that
I'm a legal exception to the transponder rules.

If I do fly the corridor (presuming no one comes up with a
reason why it's illegal) would you call anyone first (who
and say what?) or just figure it's legal, so why should I?

Mike wrote:
>
> It's a bit diffficult to see, but my sectional appears to
> say that the Class B is 70/+05 over the Lady. I know I'll
> need an NY Terminal Chart, but I'm in the planning stages.
> Is the CBAS higher than 500' there?

The floor of the class B is 1,100' over the lady. There's a point of land on the
Jersey side that's the closest point of the riverbank to the statue. The floor dips
to 500' at that point. Since you need to be at least 1,000' AGL if you get over land,
the 500' floor is sort of a moot point. The TAC will make it clear to you, but -- if
you come in over the Narrows bridge at 1,200 to 1,500', drop below 1,100' and make a
beeline for the lady, shoot the gap between the Jersey shore and the lady and Ellis
Island, staying between 600' and 1,100', you'll be fine. Stray too much to the left
of that beeline, you run the risk of getting into the 500' floor area.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Mike wrote:
>
> That's how I read it too. Anyone do this? Anyone have a
> terminal chart and can verify that I'd have to go to 500' or
> lower, or is there a sliver of 70/11 or higher east of the
> Lady that I can't see?

Most of NY harbor is under an 1,100' floor. This extends from the Jersey shore just
to the west of the Lady nearly to Brooklyn. There's a sliver of 1,500' floor along
the Brooklyn shore that extends to the Holland tunnel.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

> That's how I read it too. Anyone do this? Anyone have a
> terminal chart and can verify that I'd have to go to 500' or
> lower, or is there a sliver of 70/11 or higher east of the
> Lady that I can't see?

On the NY Terminal chart I have, there is a sliver of 70/+11 over the bay. The statue of liberty appears to be within that sliver (though at the edge of a 70/+05 piece, so I wouldn't circle it). The bottom of the Hudson (North of the Lady) is 70/15
left over from Brooklyn, the middle of the Hudson is 70/+11, and a bit North of the Washington Bridge you get 70/15 again until halfway to the TZ bridge, where it's 70/30. Going South, near the VZ Bridge it's 70/15, so if you stay below 1000 you'll
be outside the class B.

It's a nice trip. I do highly reccomend radio contact with other aircraft, so grab a handheld, listen, and self-announce.

Jose
--
for Email, make the obvious change in the address

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote:

>> Is the CBAS higher than 500' there?
>
>The floor of the class B is 1,100' over the lady.

Thanks. I managed to find a current NY TAC and can see the
route a lot better now. I suppose it's time to set up the
GPS, make some notes on reporting points and go flyin'

> I suppose it's time to set up the
> GPS

For a trip down the Hudson? No. Get the local chart, mark it with whatever will stand out, and keep your eyes out the window. Watch for aluminum and enjoy the view!

Put a sticky on the GPS. :)

Jose
--
for Email, make the obvious change in the address

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 16:07:45 -0500, Mike > wrote:

> I suppose it's time to set up the
>GPS,
You need a GPS to follow a river for 3 miles with one of the biggest
cities in the world always to one side?! Yikes.

>make some notes on reporting points and go flyin'
This sounds more like it to me....

z

> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder.
> Toks Desalu
> Dyin' to soar
> PP-ASEL

Wrong. Do it all the time.

Deb

--
1946 Luscombe 8A (His)
1948 Luscombe 8E (Hers)
1954 Cessna 195B, restoring (Ours)
Jasper, Ga. (JZP)

One of the pilots at SMQ used to run the corridor in his Champ. No Xponder
there. I'll ask him about it when I see him next.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)

I don't have to like Bush and Cheney (Or Kerry, for that matter) to love
America

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Toks Desalu wrote:
> >
> > You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder. However, I think you
can
> > get a special permission from FSDO to enter or leave without
transponder
> > for good reasons. I dont think they will give you a permission because
you
> > want to fly into that corridor without a transponder.
>
> You get it from TRACON if your aircraft has an electrical system. The
reason can be
> as simple as "I want to fly through there on my way to xxx". Getting
permission to
> actually enter the class-B is another kettle of fish, but I've heard of it
being
> arranged.
>
> As far as aircraft without electrical systems goes, FAR 91.215 states in
part --
> (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(2) of this section, any aircraft which
was not
> originally certificated with an engine-driven electrical system or which
has not
> subsequently been certified with such a system installed, balloon or
glider may
> conduct operations in the airspace within 30 nautical miles of an
airport listed
> in appendix D, section 1 of this part provided such operations are
conducted -;
>
> (i) Outside any Class A, Class B, or Class C airspace area; and
>
> (ii) Below the altitude of the ceiling of a Class B or Class C airspace
area
> designated for an airport or 10,000 feet MSL, whichever is lower; and
>
> Despite that last "and", there is no part iii in the copy of the FARs on
the AOPA web
> site.
>
> As I read that, he can run the corridor if he wants to. That's outside the
class B
> airspace.
>
> George Patterson
> If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to
have
> been looking for it.

Mike wrote:
>
> Thanks. I managed to find a current NY TAC and can see the
> route a lot better now.

Good. Now turn that TAC over and check out the helicopter routes chart on the other
side. It's larger scale and has sketches of some of the landmarks in that area (like
the air intakes for the tunnel).

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

re read the post.. he said he is covered by the exemption in 91.215, he has
no electrical system..
he can fly within the 30nm ring, stay below the ceiling and floors of the
class B not talk to a soul

but research is required for any TFRs or such

BT

"Toks Desalu" > wrote in message
...
> You cannot enter 30nm ring without a transponder. However, I think you can
> get a special permission from FSDO to enter or leave without transponder
> for good reasons. I dont think they will give you a permission because you
> want to fly into that corridor without a transponder.
>
> Toks Desalu
> Dyin' to soar
> PP-ASEL
>
>
> "Rosspilot" > wrote in message
> ...
>> >
>> >Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
>> >transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
>> >requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
>> >like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
>> >500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
>> >on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
>> >reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
>> >
>>
>>
>> I'm not so sure about transponder-less a/c inside the 30 nm ring. I
>> would
>> check on that.
>>
>> But, if so, the frequency is 123.05 on the Hudson River. Self-announce
>> position, stay right (as a highway).
>> www.Rosspilot.com
>>
>>
>
>

BTIZ wrote:
>
> but research is required for any TFRs or such

Ah, yes!

Mike, baseball season's over, but pay attention next year. When the Yankees play home
games, the corridor is blocked at the upper end of Manhattan island.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Mike > wrote in message >...
> Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
> transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
> requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
> like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
> 500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
> on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
> reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
>
> M

Yes you most certainly can. This is, after all, a free country. Just
don't get caught.

Bryan

"bryan chaisone" > wrote in message
om...
> Mike > wrote in message
> >...
>> Simple question. Can I fly the NY VFR corridor in a
>> transponderless aircraft that meets the exception
>> requirements of 91.215 (no electrical system)? It looks
>> like the answer is yes, provided I stay low enough (below
>> 500' as I turn the Lady). Any new TFR or other restrictions
>> on this? Any good intros on doing it (freq's. suggested
>> reporting points, etc.) Thanks.
>>
>
> Yes you most certainly can. This is, after all, a free country. Just
> don't get caught.
>

Semi-free country.

Mike wrote:

>>I fly in the 30 nm veil all the time. This was
>>just an extreme case, so I thought I'd see if there was
>>anything I was missing.
>
> What i was worried about was someone spotting me on primary
> radar, not knowing the FAR's and thinking "No transponder,
> 30 nm veil, approaching 9-11 ground zero - call out the
> F-16's" There's no way for anyone to tell from radar that
> I'm a legal exception to the transponder rules.

Legal or not, that would worry me too. Look at what an F-16 did to a
perfectly innocent school in southern NJ.

No doubt they'll look at your plane and assume you're carrying thousands of
pounds of high explosive.

- Andrew

zatatime > wrote:

>You need a GPS to follow a river for 3 miles with one of the biggest
>cities in the world always to one side?! Yikes.

When I visually identify a reporting point, it's nice to
know my scan included confirmation on the GPS moving map. I
sure don't want to have my head buried in the cockpit
checking the chart while flying down the most crowded VFR
corridor in America. I also looked at some pictures on the
web so I'm better able to recognize landmarks. I estimated
cruise time between points and noted that on my chart. I
jotted down some emergency frequencies and drew some arrows
to the nearest airports at dfferent points along the route
in case of engine trouble. I drew some course lines with
magnetic heading. I studied the shape of the shoreline and
decided in advance where I'd make each turn and when I'd
climb or descend. Which of those preparations would you
*not* take (in addition to leaving your GPS at home)
simply because, in your humble opinion, navigation by
following the river is a snap?

Always do as much as you can in advance, particularly the
first time. Use all your assets, keep situational
awareness, keep your options open. Redundancy is a good
thing.

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:58:19 -0500, Mike > wrote:

>When I visually identify a reporting point, it's nice to
>know my scan included confirmation on the GPS moving map.
I guess I'm just confident in my pilotage skills. I know what the
Statue of Liberty, Entrepid, Empire State building, Washington bridge,
etc. look like, so a GPS wouldn't help me. As you said the more time
outside the better, so I wouldn't waste any time looking at the GPS,
and given the well known visual cues I think you'd be better off not
using one.
> I sure don't want to have my head buried in the cockpit
>checking the chart while flying down the most crowded VFR
>corridor in America.
Agreed, and I add the GPS is just as much of a distraction as a chart
for this trip.

>I also looked at some pictures on the
>web so I'm better able to recognize landmarks.
Good idea.

> I estimated
>cruise time between points and noted that on my chart.
We both agree burying your head inside looking at a chart isn't a good
idea, and is why you stated you were using a GPS. Now it seems you'll
use your GPS, cross reference the chart, and look at your timing
device. All to track check points less than a mile apart. Sounds
like an encounter with a helicopter may be in your future.

>I jotted down some emergency frequencies and drew some arrows
>to the nearest airports at dfferent points along the route
>in case of engine trouble.
Always a good idea to plan as many outs as possible. Instead of
having multiple emergency frequencies on hand, just put 121.5 in the
other radio, or other side of the flip flop. If something goes wrong
you hit one button and transmit. At 800 feet you won't have time to
look up a frequency and dial it in, even if it is on a piece of paper.

>I drew some course lines with
>magnetic heading. I studied the shape of the shoreline and
>decided in advance where I'd make each turn and when I'd
>climb or descend.
Good to have a plan, but be ready to be flexible. I've only had one
trip up the river go EXACTLY as planned.

>Which of those preparations would you
>*not* take (in addition to leaving your GPS at home)
>simply because, in your humble opinion, navigation by
>following the river is a snap?
As already stated, I would not use a GPS, chart times to check points,
make a list of emergency frequencies, use a timer, or plan a rigid
course of events during my time in the corridor. I wouldn't do
anything except look outside vigilantly, and check my altitude and
engine gauges from time to time.


>Always do as much as you can in advance, particularly the
>first time.
Agreed, although there is such a thing as over planning in some cases.
The flight you are going to take is a perfect example of one.

>Use all your assets, keep situational
>awareness, keep your options open. Redundancy is a good
>thing.
I agree with all but the first one. And the type of redundancy I
would use is another pilot's eyes, not electronic gadgetry.


In all seriousness, if you want to have a fun, and safe trip, minimize
your expectations with regard to equipment use, and bring another
pilot who's only job is to call out traffic. If this is not possible,
try to make the flight early Sunday morning as that is the slowest
time I've seen there. If you go during the week, you will be
literally inundated with helicopter traffic buzzing all over the place
and it can get uncomfortable very quickly. While I have not made the
trip post 9/11, I have done this trip about 20 times. Every one is
different, and I've needed to, "change my shorts" on more than one
occasion since the helicopters have a much different definition of
adequate separation than most fixed wing pilots do. I can't emphasis
enough to keep use of navigation equipment to a minimum, and scanning
for traffic as a priority.

Good luck.
z

Let's not make this any more complicated than it is. Fly down the river on
right side, below 1000 ft, announce where you are (including your altitude and
direction of flight) at the GWB, the Boat Basin, Intrepid, Colgate Clock,
Lady, GZ, 34th St, (any number of others). Listen closely to 123.05 and watch
outside. It's really not that difficult.


www.Rosspilot.com

Andrew Gideon opined

>Mike wrote:

>>>I fly in the 30 nm veil all the time. This was
>>>just an extreme case, so I thought I'd see if there was
>>>anything I was missing.
>>
>> What i was worried about was someone spotting me on primary
>> radar, not knowing the FAR's and thinking "No transponder,
>> 30 nm veil, approaching 9-11 ground zero - call out the
>> F-16's" There's no way for anyone to tell from radar that
>> I'm a legal exception to the transponder rules.

>Legal or not, that would worry me too. Look at what an F-16 did to a
>perfectly innocent school in southern NJ.

Nobody's perfect.

>No doubt they'll look at your plane and assume you're carrying thousands of
>pounds of high explosive.

> - Andrew



-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

Mike wrote:

> Redundancy is a good
> thing.

Redundancy to pilotage in the Hudson corridor is...what? What can fail? Do
you expect someone to steal Manhatten, or perhaps to change the course of
the river?

Keep your head up and enjoy the view.

- Andrew

zatatime > wrote:

>I guess I'm just confident in my pilotage skills.

As am I, but like a lot of other pilots, I can make
mistakes, particularly the first time I try something, so I
make an effort to keep options open.

>I know what the
>Statue of Liberty, Entrepid, Empire State building, Washington bridge,
>etc. look like, so a GPS wouldn't help me.

I'll bet you know what airports look like too and have never
had any trouble finding one that you're unfamiliar with.
I'm not that good. In this situation, I want to be able to
give reliable position reports, not be guessing.

>As you said the more time
>outside the better, so I wouldn't waste any time looking at the GPS,

So you don't bother to look at the altimeter or engine
gauges either? I do, and my scan can pick up a relaiable
location off the GPS in a half second. It's worth that for
better situational awareness.

>Agreed, and I add the GPS is just as much of a distraction as a chart
>for this trip.

Baloney. This is one of the most complicated set of
overlapping layers of airspace there is, and with 9-11
ground zero nearby and no transponder, the consequences of a
mistake here are extremely severe. Given that this is my
first time through, in a 60+ year old aircraft, I'm going to
do the advanced setup that gives me the best situational
awareness available.

>We both agree burying your head inside looking at a chart isn't a good
>idea, and is why you stated you were using a GPS. Now it seems you'll
>use your GPS, cross reference the chart, and look at your timing
>device. All to track check points less than a mile apart. Sounds
>like an encounter with a helicopter may be in your future.

This is a 3 hour flight for me. I pointed out some of the
many advantages of preparation so I'm familiar with what is
going to happen and have resources ready at hand for
emergencies. You turn my prep work into "That's all bad
because you'll have your head buried." I't s like saying
you shouldn't carry written landing or emergency checklists
since you need to fly the aircraft during landing or an
emergency. The act of preparing such items and looking at
them beforehand to familiarize yourself, and knowing they
are there for reference when needed is the point of doing
that work.

>Always a good idea to plan as many outs as possible. Instead of
>having multiple emergency frequencies on hand, just put 121.5 in the
>other radio, or other side of the flip flop.

Other radio? Flip flop? Do you recall this is a 91.215
"not originally certificated with an engine-driven
electrical system" aircraft? This is a handheld we're
talking about.

> If something goes wrong
>you hit one button and transmit. At 800 feet you won't have time to
>look up a frequency and dial it in, even if it is on a piece of paper.

I'm going to have to.

>As already stated, I would not use a GPS,

I would.

>chart times to check points,

I didn't - it's a 3 hour flight in an aircraft that holds 3
hours of fuel.

>make a list of emergency frequencies,

I thought the recommendation I read from others who had
flown the corridor to know the freq of Newark was a good
one.

>use a timer,

I dont even have a timer, just a watch so I can check my
fuel burn.

>or plan a rigid
>course of events during my time in the corridor.

I don't consider my plan "rigid" - it's "flexible" with lots
of options.

> I wouldn't do
>anything except look outside vigilantly, and check my altitude and
>engine gauges from time to time.

That's exactly what I'll do, except my "from time to time"
check will give me more information, and I'll have more
options at the ready.

>>Use all your assets, keep situational
>>awareness, keep your options open. Redundancy is a good
>>thing.
>I agree with all but the first one. And the type of redundancy I
>would use is another pilot's eyes, not electronic gadgetry.

I've got two sets of eyes and the "gadgetry" that will let
me carry a few extra hundred feet when it's legal. That
extra alttiude can make the difference when you're flying as
low as this requires.

>In all seriousness, if you want to have a fun, and safe trip, minimize
>your expectations with regard to equipment use,

It's already minimized, it's just ready.

>and bring another pilot who's only job is to call out traffic.

She's looking forward to it.

>try to make the flight early Sunday morning as that is the slowest
>time I've seen there.

Called FSS Sun morn (yesterday) on a beautiful day. At the
end of a long briefing, where the most interesting thing was
forecast 10-15 knot winds, the briefer then said "NOTAM-
expected heavy helicopter activity in the vicinity of the
Verrazano Narrows Bridge in connection with the New York
Marathon."

Maybe next week....

> If you go during the week, you will be
>literally inundated with helicopter traffic buzzing all over the place
>and it can get uncomfortable very quickly. While I have not made the
>trip post 9/11, I have done this trip about 20 times. Every one is
>different, and I've needed to, "change my shorts" on more than one
>occasion since the helicopters have a much different definition of
>adequate separation than most fixed wing pilots do. I can't emphasis
>enough to keep use of navigation equipment to a minimum, and scanning
>for traffic as a priority.
>
>Good luck.

Thanks - really. I'm sure it will be great fun.

Mike > wrote:
> I didn't - it's a 3 hour flight in an aircraft that holds 3
> hours of fuel.

Um, 30-minute fuel reserve?

.... Alan

--
Alan Gerber
gerber AT panix DOT com

Alan Gerber > wrote:
>> it's a 3 hour flight in an aircraft that holds 3
>> hours of fuel.
>
>Um, 30-minute fuel reserve?

Um, fuel stop?

The point was that my preflight work - from GPS to notes on
the chart - was for an entire flight, not just the few
miles in the vicinity of the Lady.