Ridge Soaring FAR's

[Tim Hanke]

We had a soaring encampment in Lake Placid, NY. We had a complaint from the Adirondack Park Rangers about a sailplane ridge soaring a particular set of mountains. The Ranger noted that the sailplane was in danger to hikers walking the ridge line. What FAR's allow the sailplane to stay a loft using the ridge as a source of lift? We stopped all ridge flying for now.

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Monday, September 30, 2013 4:32:10 AM UTC-7, Tim Hanke wrote:
> We had a soaring encampment in Lake Placid, NY. We had a complaint from the Adirondack Park Rangers about a sailplane ridge soaring a particular set of mountains. The Ranger noted that the sailplane was in danger to hikers walking the ridge line. What FAR's allow the sailplane to stay a loft using the ridge as a source of lift? We stopped all ridge flying for now.

It is illegal to fly an aircraft closer than 500 feet from people, places or things, unless while in the act of landing. So, the ranger is probably correct.
JJ

[Tom[_12_]]

Hi Tim,

I wonder if the glider pilots are flying in the correct position while ridge soaring.

The best lift is in front of the ridge rather along the crest.

Further - incidental passing by is different than buzzing and showing off.

See FAR 91.119 (b & c)

Tom

[[email protected]]

As far as I know, the only FARs that allow the sailplane to stay aloft are those that are being burned to make room for the new editions.

[Chris]

Yes - stay away from the hikers waving and taking pictures in excitement.
Authority mongers - argh

[[email protected]]

On Monday, September 30, 2013 7:32:10 AM UTC-4, Tim Hanke wrote:
> We had a soaring encampment in Lake Placid, NY. We had a complaint from the Adirondack Park Rangers about a sailplane ridge soaring a particular set of mountains. The Ranger noted that the sailplane was in danger to hikers walking the ridge line. What FAR's allow the sailplane to stay a loft using the ridge as a source of lift? We stopped all ridge flying for now.

91.3 allows the pilot to deviate from any regulation to the extent required to address an emergency situation. Perhaps the pilot in question was ridge flying to avoid a landing in the trees.... Other than that I think the 500 foot rule applies.

[[email protected]]

§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.


This sounds like a "sparsely populated area" which is our excuse for ridge soaring. But less than 500 feet from people is in the rules.

Perhaps you could use this as a basis for a constructive discussion with the rangers. Here is what we're allowed to do. If there are known concentrations of people, like a well traveled hiking trail or campground, agree to stay 500 feet away. And perhaps a discussion of just what dangers gliders operating regularly -- not buzzing -- pose to people on the ground would help.

John Cochrane

[Tim Taylor]

Tim,

The answers so far have been very good. The one thing I would encourage is for your group to also do an honest assessment what occurred. Were there pilots in your group buzzing hikers? Yes, it is fun to show off and great to wave at hikers, but in a National Park you just maintain a reasonable distance and avoid pointing gliders directly at people. There is almost no reason to be that close to a ridge that a legitimate complaint would be made..

Others have suggested a dialog and I would encourage you to act as an ambassador for soaring. Meet with the park ranger to understand the concern and make sure your pilots are being respectful of all users of the area. Not everyone enjoys a fast moving object flying near them while they are out in nature.

[waremark]

In the UK there is exemption to the 500 foot rule for hill soaring (according to BGA Laws and Rules p 33). We regularly fly much closer than 500 foot on the small 300 foot ridge adjacent to our airfield. It would be quite normal to soar down to say 100 foot over the ridge. Soaring gliders in this location are regarded as a tourist attraction (and no, not only by members of the gliding club!).

[[email protected]]

On Monday, September 30, 2013 7:32:10 AM UTC-4, Tim Hanke wrote:
> We had a soaring encampment in Lake Placid, NY. We had a complaint from the Adirondack Park Rangers about a sailplane ridge soaring a particular set of mountains. The Ranger noted that the sailplane was in danger to hikers walking the ridge line. What FAR's allow the sailplane to stay a loft using the ridge as a source of lift? We stopped all ridge flying for now.

There must be some reason for the complaint. Per the other posts, an honest dialog with the Rangers about what happened is in order. It's hard to believe that anyone would be flying that close to the ridge that someone perceive it as a danger to people on the ridge.

A dialog with the Rangers on who actually saw the alleged close encounter would be helpful.

I am not aware of any complaints about our 50 years of ridge soaring on the ridge east of Dansville, NY. This ridge is tree covered and sparsely interspersed with residences so it may be different than a bare ridge where you were soaring in the Adirondacks.

[jfitch]

On Monday, September 30, 2013 4:32:10 AM UTC-7, Tim Hanke wrote:
> We had a soaring encampment in Lake Placid, NY. We had a complaint from the Adirondack Park Rangers about a sailplane ridge soaring a particular set of mountains. The Ranger noted that the sailplane was in danger to hikers walking the ridge line. What FAR's allow the sailplane to stay a loft using the ridge as a source of lift? We stopped all ridge flying for now.

There is also this from the AIM:


7-4-6. Flights Over Charted U.S. Wildlife Refuges, Parks, and Forest Service Areas

.......

b. Pilots are requested to maintain a minimum altitude of 2,000 feet above the surface of the following: National Parks, Monuments, Seashores, Lakeshores, Recreation Areas and Scenic Riverways administered by the National Park Service, National Wildlife Refuges, Big Game Refuges, Game Ranges and Wildlife Ranges administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wilderness and Primitive areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service.


Now requests aren't regulations, but it might be best to respect the requests, or they will turn into regulations.

[[email protected]]

Wondered if this would ever come up. The answer ain't pretty. And I caution everyone to think real hard before asking the FAA for clarification. Ugly can of worms.
I'd suggest the SSA rule types see if they can quietly get gliders bumped into the helicopter, PPC, or weightshift exemptions section of 91.119