Cloud Flying

[Shawn Knickerbocker]

Viewed the discussion on cloud flying. I have been
cloud flying in sailplanes for over 15 yrs....IMC flying
that is. Currently I have a Nimbus 3, modified to 26
M with an EFIS. Cloud flying is legal in the USA as
long as you have a clearance in controlled airspace
and the required equipment as per the manufacture.
I recommend gyro instruments as well; furthermore,
it’s not for everyone!

It is dangerous, unless you have the required instruments
and the training and qualifications. Having a caviler
attitude by just being sucked up into a towering Cu,
is asking for trouble and you may cause a midair collision.
Understanding, no airplane pilot will b e flying through
a tower Cu....however, do not do it unless you are
qualified.

It is very enjoyable as well and exhilarating!

For the Far 61.57, that addresses to carry passengers
only. So, if you are solo, that section of the regs
does not apply.

I will be submitting a short article to soaring in
the next few weeks on the subject. I am completing
a training booklet on the subject. Also, hope to be
able to give a short talk/presentation at the 2007
convention. Would enjoy answering any questions you
may have.

Shawn

[snoop]

Shawn,

Thank you for this information. I've been wondering about this very
subject. I'm just curious if you have discussed this with your local
FSDO, and or any local air traffic controllers. I'm still looking for
the reg that says gliders don't have to have the required 24 month
checks on their xponder, static system, etc. Where do I find that?

Also, your efis equipment, is it approved equipment? I'm sure it's not,
say, some of that efis equipment that homebuilders are putting in their
ships. The equipment in your panel has to be approved for IFR flight
doesn't it? I know it looks and works great, but a lot, most of its'
not approved for IFR flight.

Also, when you receive your ATC clearance, how does the controller give
you an altitude? In what format?

There are a lot of questions that I need to answer about IFR flight in
gliders. I know my local Flight Standard Districto Office would have
questions for me if I didn't do it right.

I look forward to your article, and your answers.

Snoop
Shawn Knickerbocker wrote:
> Viewed the discussion on cloud flying. I have been
> cloud flying in sailplanes for over 15 yrs....IMC flying
> that is. Currently I have a Nimbus 3, modified to 26
> M with an EFIS. Cloud flying is legal in the USA as
> long as you have a clearance in controlled airspace
> and the required equipment as per the manufacture.
> I recommend gyro instruments as well; furthermore,
> it's not for everyone!
>
> It is dangerous, unless you have the required instruments
> and the training and qualifications. Having a caviler
> attitude by just being sucked up into a towering Cu,
> is asking for trouble and you may cause a midair collision.
> Understanding, no airplane pilot will b e flying through
> a tower Cu....however, do not do it unless you are
> qualified.
>
> It is very enjoyable as well and exhilarating!
>
> For the Far 61.57, that addresses to carry passengers
> only. So, if you are solo, that section of the regs
> does not apply.
>
> I will be submitting a short article to soaring in
> the next few weeks on the subject. I am completing
> a training booklet on the subject. Also, hope to be
> able to give a short talk/presentation at the 2007
> convention. Would enjoy answering any questions you
> may have.
>
> Shawn

[Brian[_1_]]

Regarding approved instruments in gliders...

For in the US Try Reading the FAR's, I may have missed something, But I
can find no FAR that requires any instruments for unpowered aircraft(
FAR 91.205 is for powered aircraft only.)
If it is not required it certainly does not need to be approved. Type
Data sheets and/or the Manfacturer in the US may have there own
requirements.

On the other hand if you are going to fly Class A,B or C airspace then
a TSO Transponder is certainly required (Unless you have obtained a
Waiver) by FAR 91.215 along with the required inspections for it.

Brian



snoop wrote:
> Shawn,
>
> Thank you for this information. I've been wondering about this very
> subject. I'm just curious if you have discussed this with your local
> FSDO, and or any local air traffic controllers. I'm still looking for
> the reg that says gliders don't have to have the required 24 month
> checks on their xponder, static system, etc. Where do I find that?
>
> Also, your efis equipment, is it approved equipment? I'm sure it's not,
> say, some of that efis equipment that homebuilders are putting in their
> ships. The equipment in your panel has to be approved for IFR flight
> doesn't it? I know it looks and works great, but a lot, most of its'
> not approved for IFR flight.
>
> Also, when you receive your ATC clearance, how does the controller give
> you an altitude? In what format?
>
> There are a lot of questions that I need to answer about IFR flight in
> gliders. I know my local Flight Standard Districto Office would have
> questions for me if I didn't do it right.
>
> I look forward to your article, and your answers.
>
> Snoop

[snoop]

Son, we're talking IFR flight here. Try reading the first post.


Brian wrote:
> Regarding approved instruments in gliders...
>
> For in the US Try Reading the FAR's, I may have missed something, But I
> can find no FAR that requires any instruments for unpowered aircraft(
> FAR 91.205 is for powered aircraft only.)
> If it is not required it certainly does not need to be approved. Type
> Data sheets and/or the Manfacturer in the US may have there own
> requirements.
>
> On the other hand if you are going to fly Class A,B or C airspace then
> a TSO Transponder is certainly required (Unless you have obtained a
> Waiver) by FAR 91.215 along with the required inspections for it.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> snoop wrote:
> > Shawn,
> >
> > Thank you for this information. I've been wondering about this very
> > subject. I'm just curious if you have discussed this with your local
> > FSDO, and or any local air traffic controllers. I'm still looking for
> > the reg that says gliders don't have to have the required 24 month
> > checks on their xponder, static system, etc. Where do I find that?
> >
> > Also, your efis equipment, is it approved equipment? I'm sure it's not,
> > say, some of that efis equipment that homebuilders are putting in their
> > ships. The equipment in your panel has to be approved for IFR flight
> > doesn't it? I know it looks and works great, but a lot, most of its'
> > not approved for IFR flight.
> >
> > Also, when you receive your ATC clearance, how does the controller give
> > you an altitude? In what format?
> >
> > There are a lot of questions that I need to answer about IFR flight in
> > gliders. I know my local Flight Standard Districto Office would have
> > questions for me if I didn't do it right.
> >
> > I look forward to your article, and your answers.
> >
> > Snoop

[[email protected]]

snoop wrote:
> Son, we're talking IFR flight here. Try reading the first post.
>
>
> Brian wrote:
> > Regarding approved instruments in gliders...
> >
> > For in the US Try Reading the FAR's, I may have missed something, But I
> > can find no FAR that requires any instruments for unpowered aircraft(
> > FAR 91.205 is for powered aircraft only.)
> > If it is not required it certainly does not need to be approved. Type
> > Data sheets and/or the Manfacturer in the US may have there own
> > requirements.
> >
> > On the other hand if you are going to fly Class A,B or C airspace then
> > a TSO Transponder is certainly required (Unless you have obtained a
> > Waiver) by FAR 91.215 along with the required inspections for it.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> > snoop wrote:
> > > Shawn,
> > >
> > > Thank you for this information. I've been wondering about this very
> > > subject. I'm just curious if you have discussed this with your local
> > > FSDO, and or any local air traffic controllers. I'm still looking for
> > > the reg that says gliders don't have to have the required 24 month
> > > checks on their xponder, static system, etc. Where do I find that?
> > >
> > > Also, your efis equipment, is it approved equipment? I'm sure it's not,
> > > say, some of that efis equipment that homebuilders are putting in their
> > > ships. The equipment in your panel has to be approved for IFR flight
> > > doesn't it? I know it looks and works great, but a lot, most of its'
> > > not approved for IFR flight.
> > >
> > > Also, when you receive your ATC clearance, how does the controller give
> > > you an altitude? In what format?
> > >
> > > There are a lot of questions that I need to answer about IFR flight in
> > > gliders. I know my local Flight Standard Districto Office would have
> > > questions for me if I didn't do it right.
> > >
> > > I look forward to your article, and your answers.
> > >
> > > Snoop

Yeah, IFR it is....I am very curious about that article, will you
include all the FAR's and AIM's for glider flight in IMC? How about
xponder check out every 24 months? How about the instrument rating? Is
one available for a glider? And yeah, how about the clearance? Do you
get a pop-up clearance or , since you are not flying from controlled
airport simply have a void time? I would like to be educated in all of
those aspects.

Thanks,

Jacek
Washington State

[snoop]

Good questions, jacekkobiesa.

Shawn, I thought of another IFR glider question. So you tow up, the
ceiling is around 2500agl, there's lift, you get your clearance, climb
into the clouds, fly around on whatever kind of clearance it is you
get, and the ceiling drops down to say, still VFR, but it drops to
1000'AGL. How does an IFR glider make an approach, or even get down to
minimum vectoring altitude? I'm curious what the the local controllers,
who are protecting their airspace, what pages in the TERPS Manual do
they flip to? Curious.

C'mon you USA IFR glider pilots, jump in here. I know they cloud fly
elsewhere in the world, but I think we'd all like to hear how to do it
here at home.

snoop


wrote:
> snoop wrote:
> > Son, we're talking IFR flight here. Try reading the first post.
> >
> >
> > Brian wrote:
> > > Regarding approved instruments in gliders...
> > >
> > > For in the US Try Reading the FAR's, I may have missed something, But I
> > > can find no FAR that requires any instruments for unpowered aircraft(
> > > FAR 91.205 is for powered aircraft only.)
> > > If it is not required it certainly does not need to be approved. Type
> > > Data sheets and/or the Manfacturer in the US may have there own
> > > requirements.
> > >
> > > On the other hand if you are going to fly Class A,B or C airspace then
> > > a TSO Transponder is certainly required (Unless you have obtained a
> > > Waiver) by FAR 91.215 along with the required inspections for it.
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > snoop wrote:
> > > > Shawn,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for this information. I've been wondering about this very
> > > > subject. I'm just curious if you have discussed this with your local
> > > > FSDO, and or any local air traffic controllers. I'm still looking for
> > > > the reg that says gliders don't have to have the required 24 month
> > > > checks on their xponder, static system, etc. Where do I find that?
> > > >
> > > > Also, your efis equipment, is it approved equipment? I'm sure it's not,
> > > > say, some of that efis equipment that homebuilders are putting in their
> > > > ships. The equipment in your panel has to be approved for IFR flight
> > > > doesn't it? I know it looks and works great, but a lot, most of its'
> > > > not approved for IFR flight.
> > > >
> > > > Also, when you receive your ATC clearance, how does the controller give
> > > > you an altitude? In what format?
> > > >
> > > > There are a lot of questions that I need to answer about IFR flight in
> > > > gliders. I know my local Flight Standard Districto Office would have
> > > > questions for me if I didn't do it right.
> > > >
> > > > I look forward to your article, and your answers.
> > > >
> > > > Snoop
>
> Yeah, IFR it is....I am very curious about that article, will you
> include all the FAR's and AIM's for glider flight in IMC? How about
> xponder check out every 24 months? How about the instrument rating? Is
> one available for a glider? And yeah, how about the clearance? Do you
> get a pop-up clearance or , since you are not flying from controlled
> airport simply have a void time? I would like to be educated in all of
> those aspects.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacek
> Washington State

[58y]

snoop wrote:

> Shawn, I thought of another IFR glider question. So you tow up, the
> ceiling is around 2500agl, there's lift, you get your clearance, climb
> into the clouds, fly around on whatever kind of clearance it is you
> get, and the ceiling drops down to say, still VFR, but it drops to
> 1000'AGL. How does an IFR glider make an approach, or even get down to
> minimum vectoring altitude? I'm curious what the the local controllers,
> who are protecting their airspace, what pages in the TERPS Manual do
> they flip to? Curious.


What do they do when flying in wave out west with the threat of the
fain(sp?) gap closing? You stay ahead of the weather. Same thing you do
in any aircraft, on every flight. There's always the chance the
destination can go below your minimums, in a 1-26 or in a 757. Don't
make it look harder than it is.

Anybody that has a personal problem with flying in clouds shouldn't do
it. It can be done safely, under limited circumstances, and our effort
ought to be to show people how to do it safely and legally, not to scare
them away.


Jack

[snoop]

Sorry Jack but your dead wrong. There are flesh and bone reasons why we
should teach people why we don't penetrate clouds, in US
gliders/airspace. Actually, the legal reasons are what the thread here
is searching for.

Consider this Jack. You just got called in by the FAA for IFR glider
flying here in the USA. Let's be optimistic and say nobody ran into you
and you didn't kill anybody. But now our sport is on the carpet because
you broke the law, and your flying days are done due to FAA certificate
action.
Nice, now what questions would you be re asking yourself, and what
lame exscuses would you try to present to the inspectors, and the
unlimited expert witnesses sitting in the room.. There aren't any. Buy
a nice ASA FAR/AIM book and catch up on your reading.

With regard to wave flying, yes we get a window, and stay out of the
clouds and ahead of the weather. I've flown the wave window at Marfa,
where we had a window, a chunk of airspace, but still not a clearance
into IFR conditions. The topic here is getting a clearance and going
into solid IFR. Jack I'm open for enlightenment on how to legally do
it.

Your statement " it can be done safely under limited circumstances"
won't hold up when your dancin' for the FAA.

Thanks for your input,

Snoop


58y wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>
> > Shawn, I thought of another IFR glider question. So you tow up, the
> > ceiling is around 2500agl, there's lift, you get your clearance, climb
> > into the clouds, fly around on whatever kind of clearance it is you
> > get, and the ceiling drops down to say, still VFR, but it drops to
> > 1000'AGL. How does an IFR glider make an approach, or even get down to
> > minimum vectoring altitude? I'm curious what the the local controllers,
> > who are protecting their airspace, what pages in the TERPS Manual do
> > they flip to? Curious.
>
>
> What do they do when flying in wave out west with the threat of the
> fain(sp?) gap closing? You stay ahead of the weather. Same thing you do
> in any aircraft, on every flight. There's always the chance the
> destination can go below your minimums, in a 1-26 or in a 757. Don't
> make it look harder than it is.
>
> Anybody that has a personal problem with flying in clouds shouldn't do
> it. It can be done safely, under limited circumstances, and our effort
> ought to be to show people how to do it safely and legally, not to scare
> them away.
>
>
> Jack

[[email protected]]

58y wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>
> > Shawn, I thought of another IFR glider question. So you tow up, the
> > ceiling is around 2500agl, there's lift, you get your clearance, climb
> > into the clouds, fly around on whatever kind of clearance it is you
> > get, and the ceiling drops down to say, still VFR, but it drops to
> > 1000'AGL. How does an IFR glider make an approach, or even get down to
> > minimum vectoring altitude? I'm curious what the the local controllers,
> > who are protecting their airspace, what pages in the TERPS Manual do
> > they flip to? Curious.
>
>
> What do they do when flying in wave out west with the threat of the
> fain(sp?) gap closing? You stay ahead of the weather. Same thing you do
> in any aircraft, on every flight. There's always the chance the
> destination can go below your minimums, in a 1-26 or in a 757. Don't
> make it look harder than it is.
>
> Anybody that has a personal problem with flying in clouds shouldn't do
> it. It can be done safely, under limited circumstances, and our effort
> ought to be to show people how to do it safely and legally, not to scare
> them away.
>
>
> Jack

Jack,

No matter what you fly in general aviation accessible to an average
pilot is difficult to fly in a cloud(s). The only thing pilots here,
"out west" flying wave are using is some sort of attitude indicator.
And don't mix any glider with a 757, there is no comparison. Period.
And when I go wave flying (I don't have any IFR instruments in my
glider) I pay very close attention to the foehn gap. And if you get
trap on top you have very unpleasant descent through a cloud(s); how
about the terrain below you? what other navigation means do you use to
know your position to nearest nav-aids or the ground? I would not take
any chances flying here, "out west" with flight into IMC. And don't
mistake occasional flight through an outer edge of a cloud, which will
last a few seconds with a flight in solid cloud. And if you would like
come here and visit with us, I'll take you for a wave flight which more
than likely will change your outlook on flying in limited visibility
and with a terrain of about 14,000 ft. around you. It is not scary, it
is a fact.

So, having said that, as a power, glider, instructor, etc. pilot, if my
knowledge is limited I would like to update that. If I don't know
something I would like to learn. So, I am waiting for explanation(s) as
well as I am looking forward to the publication mentioned by the
original poster.

Jacek
Washington State

[snoop]

I'd love to take a wave flight out in WA. with you. Your correct we're
not talking about the occasional zip through a wisp.

But let's be up front here, you mentioned the 757, not me, and yes this
thread is anxiously waiting to hear from it's author on the subject of
IFR glider flying with a clearance, Shawn.



wrote:
> 58y wrote:
> > snoop wrote:
> >
> > > Shawn, I thought of another IFR glider question. So you tow up, the
> > > ceiling is around 2500agl, there's lift, you get your clearance, climb
> > > into the clouds, fly around on whatever kind of clearance it is you
> > > get, and the ceiling drops down to say, still VFR, but it drops to
> > > 1000'AGL. How does an IFR glider make an approach, or even get down to
> > > minimum vectoring altitude? I'm curious what the the local controllers,
> > > who are protecting their airspace, what pages in the TERPS Manual do
> > > they flip to? Curious.
> >
> >
> > What do they do when flying in wave out west with the threat of the
> > fain(sp?) gap closing? You stay ahead of the weather. Same thing you do
> > in any aircraft, on every flight. There's always the chance the
> > destination can go below your minimums, in a 1-26 or in a 757. Don't
> > make it look harder than it is.
> >
> > Anybody that has a personal problem with flying in clouds shouldn't do
> > it. It can be done safely, under limited circumstances, and our effort
> > ought to be to show people how to do it safely and legally, not to scare
> > them away.
> >
> >
> > Jack
>
> Jack,
>
> No matter what you fly in general aviation accessible to an average
> pilot is difficult to fly in a cloud(s). The only thing pilots here,
> "out west" flying wave are using is some sort of attitude indicator.
> And don't mix any glider with a 757, there is no comparison. Period.
> And when I go wave flying (I don't have any IFR instruments in my
> glider) I pay very close attention to the foehn gap. And if you get
> trap on top you have very unpleasant descent through a cloud(s); how
> about the terrain below you? what other navigation means do you use to
> know your position to nearest nav-aids or the ground? I would not take
> any chances flying here, "out west" with flight into IMC. And don't
> mistake occasional flight through an outer edge of a cloud, which will
> last a few seconds with a flight in solid cloud. And if you would like
> come here and visit with us, I'll take you for a wave flight which more
> than likely will change your outlook on flying in limited visibility
> and with a terrain of about 14,000 ft. around you. It is not scary, it
> is a fact.
>
> So, having said that, as a power, glider, instructor, etc. pilot, if my
> knowledge is limited I would like to update that. If I don't know
> something I would like to learn. So, I am waiting for explanation(s) as
> well as I am looking forward to the publication mentioned by the
> original poster.
>
> Jacek
> Washington State

[Brian[_1_]]

I fully understood that we were talking IFR Flight.

The only additional requirement I can find for IFR flight in Class G
airspace is that the pilot be instrument rated and Current. Note: that
an airplane instrument rating is valid in a glider.

I was recently flying with a group of 15 glider pilots I believe at
least 3 of these pilots also had instrument ratings.

In Class D & E airspace a Clearance is a also required.

In Class ABC Airspace a Transponder is required with the current
inspections.

I am looking forward to seeing his book on cloud flying, This is
defiently a topic that does not get much attention in the US and as
result there seems to be a lot of misinformation about it as evidenced
by this thread.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL






snoop wrote:
> Son, we're talking IFR flight here. Try reading the first post.
>
>

[Fox Two]

Jacek,

I'm anxiously awaiting the article as well! Until it is, though, here
are some tasty morsels:

There aren't any FAR's that clearly say: "To fly a glider under IFR,
you must..." But there are some regs that we can correlate together to
find that, yes, flying a glider under IFR is completely legal. Such
as:

There is no instrument rating available for gliders, as is specified by
CFAR § 61.5(b)(8):

§ 61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part.
b) The following ratings are placed on a pilot certificate (other than
student pilot) when an applicant satisfactorily accomplishes the
training and certification requirements for the rating sought:
(8) Instrument ratings (on private and commercial pilot certificates
only)-
(i) Instrument-Airplane.
(ii) Instrument-Helicopter.
(iii) Instrument-Powered-lift.


But, CFAR § 61.3(e)(3) states that a pilot can get certified to fly a
glider under IFR:

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
an airplane instrument rating.


And, CFAR § 61.57(c)(2) specifies the recent pilot experience needed
to act as PIC in a glider under IFR:

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
(c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless within the
preceding 6 calendar months, that person has:
(2) For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in a glider,
performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions-

(i) At least 3 hours of instrument time in flight, of which 1 1/2 hours
may be acquired in an airplane or a glider if no passengers are to be
carried; or
(ii) 3 hours of instrument time in flight in a glider if a passenger is
to be carried.


Furthermore, CFAR § 61.57(d)(1)(iii) specifies how a glider pilot can
get an instrument competency check:

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
(d) Instrument proficiency check. Except as provided in paragraph (e)
of this section, a person who does not meet the instrument experience
requirements of paragraph (c) of this section within the prescribed
time, or within 6 calendar months after the prescribed time, may not
serve as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than
the minimums prescribed for VFR until that person passes an instrument
proficiency check consisting of a representative number of tasks
required by the instrument rating practical test.
(1) The instrument proficiency check must be-
(iii) For a glider, in a single-engine airplane or a glider.


As far as inspections are concerned, CFAR § 91.413(a) does not exempt
gliders from the 24-month transponder inspection requirement:

§ 91.413 ATC transponder tests and inspections.
(a) No persons may use an ATC transponder that is specified in
91.215(a), 121.345(c), or §135.143(c) of this chapter unless, within
the preceding 24 calendar months, the ATC transponder has been tested
and inspected and found to comply with appendix F of part 43 of this
chapter.


But the altimeter inspection required by CFAR § 91.411 only applies to
airplanes and helicopters:

§ 91.411 Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and
inspections.
(a) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled
airspace under IFR unless- <snip>


Equipment requirements to certify your glider for IFR flight are
determined by the manufacturer, and the FAA. If you certify your
glider with an Experimental Airworthiness Certificate, you will need to
comply with your certificate's limitations, just like any other
experimantal aircraft.


As far as the procedure for receiving your IFR clearance is concerned,
you can use any approved method, there aren't any special procedures
for gliders.


And, FYI, I just visited the Schempp-Hirth factory last week where I
saw a beautiful new IFR-certified Ventus with a US registration. Yes,
it's legal.

Chris Fleming, F2





wrote:
>
> Yeah, IFR it is....I am very curious about that article, will you
> include all the FAR's and AIM's for glider flight in IMC? How about
> xponder check out every 24 months? How about the instrument rating? Is
> one available for a glider? And yeah, how about the clearance? Do you
> get a pop-up clearance or , since you are not flying from controlled
> airport simply have a void time? I would like to be educated in all of
> those aspects.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacek
> Washington State

[snoop]

Brian, I have my FAR/AIM book open. In part 91, give me the glider
specific regs that tell me how to fly a glider, on an IFR clearance in
the US. I just reread the requirements for an instrument rating, and
nowhere does the word glider show up in FAR 61.65. Shawn, help us out
here.

F2, thanks for your input, but were shaking down the US regs here.


Brian wrote:
> I fully understood that we were talking IFR Flight.
>
> The only additional requirement I can find for IFR flight in Class G
> airspace is that the pilot be instrument rated and Current. Note: that
> an airplane instrument rating is valid in a glider.
>
> I was recently flying with a group of 15 glider pilots I believe at
> least 3 of these pilots also had instrument ratings.
>
> In Class D & E airspace a Clearance is a also required.
>
> In Class ABC Airspace a Transponder is required with the current
> inspections.
>
> I am looking forward to seeing his book on cloud flying, This is
> defiently a topic that does not get much attention in the US and as
> result there seems to be a lot of misinformation about it as evidenced
> by this thread.
>
> Brian
> CFIIG/ASEL
>
>
>
>
>
>
> snoop wrote:
> > Son, we're talking IFR flight here. Try reading the first post.
> >
> >

[Fox Two]

snoop wrote:
> Brian, I have my FAR/AIM book open. In part 91, give me the glider
> specific regs that tell me how to fly a glider, on an IFR clearance in
> the US. I just reread the requirements for an instrument rating, and
> nowhere does the word glider show up in FAR 61.65. Shawn, help us out
> here.
>
> F2, thanks for your input, but were shaking down the US regs here.
>

Snoop, those are US regs! What reg are you trying to "shake down?" I
quoted the exact regs that clearly legalize IFR flying in gliders in
the USA.

Chris Fleming, F2

[Brian[_1_]]

It may take me bit to remember where the actual authorization for a
airplane instrument rating to qualify for a glider rating is.

As a start though FAR 61.57c2 tells you how to remain or get instrument
current for gliders.

Brian

snoop wrote:
> Brian, I have my FAR/AIM book open. In part 91, give me the glider
> specific regs that tell me how to fly a glider, on an IFR clearance in
> the US. I just reread the requirements for an instrument rating, and
> nowhere does the word glider show up in FAR 61.65. Shawn, help us out
> here.
>
> F2, thanks for your input, but were shaking down the US regs here.
>
>

[Fox Two]

Brian wrote:
> It may take me bit to remember where the actual authorization for a
> airplane instrument rating to qualify for a glider rating is.
>
> As a start though FAR 61.57c2 tells you how to remain or get instrument
> current for gliders.
>
> Brian
>


Brian,

CFAR § 61.3(e)(3) states that to fly a glider under IFR, the PIC needs
to hold an airplane instrument rating and a glider rating:

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil

aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and

an airplane instrument rating.

Chris Fleming, F2

[Brian[_1_]]

It didn't take me as long to find at as I thought it might:

FAR 61.3e3

(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:

(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and
instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane,
helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;

(2) An airline transport pilot certificate with the appropriate
aircraft category, class, and type rating (if required) for the
aircraft being flown;

(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
an airplane instrument rating; or

Brian

[Brian[_1_]]

It didn't take me as long to find at as I thought it might:

FAR 61.3e3

(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:

(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and
instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane,
helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;

(2) An airline transport pilot certificate with the appropriate
aircraft category, class, and type rating (if required) for the
aircraft being flown;

(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
an airplane instrument rating; or

Brian

[snoop]

Good find. That's what I saw, in the same vein, with 61.57, how to stay
current, but the requirements for an instrument rating still leave us
hanging out there, as mentioned earlier. Now we need the operational or
part 91 end of it. How to do it. Hang in there guys, Shawn, c'mon buddy
we need you to help here.

Brian wrote:
> It didn't take me as long to find at as I thought it might:
>
> FAR 61.3e3
>
> (e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
> aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
> prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
>
> (1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and
> instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane,
> helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;
>
> (2) An airline transport pilot certificate with the appropriate
> aircraft category, class, and type rating (if required) for the
> aircraft being flown;
>
> (3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
> an airplane instrument rating; or
>
> Brian

[Fox Two]

snoop wrote:
> Good find. That's what I saw, in the same vein, with 61.57, how to stay
> current, but the requirements for an instrument rating still leave us
> hanging out there, as mentioned earlier. Now we need the operational or
> part 91 end of it. How to do it. Hang in there guys, Shawn, c'mon buddy
> we need you to help here.
>

Snoop-

What are you talking about?! Ask a specific question! Flying a glider
under IFR is EXACTLY THE SAME as flying an airplane under IFR. That is
why an instrument rating in airplanes is required to fly a glider under
IFR. Here's how you do it:

1. File the flight plan.
2. Receive the ATC clearance.
3. Fly the glider!

If your flight is intended to be local in nature, you request a block
clearance both laterally and vertically, and remain within your
clearance limits. If you are flying cross country, you receive a route
clearance with authorization to deviate up to x miles left and right of
course within a block altitude limit.

If you already have your instument-airplane rating, and a few hundered
hours of instrument experinece, you should already know all of this.
If you don't, then you shouldn't consider flying a glider IFR.

Chris Fleming, F2

[snoop]

Chris,

Specifically, where does the clearance begin, and end. ATC is going to
want a starting point and an exit point. Going back to my earlier note,
how do you get up and down? The cloud layer closes in below you while
your going x country IFR in a pure glider, how do you legally get down.
You are coming down somewhere, I don't have an argument there, but ATC
has a big manual called the TERPS Manual that they have to operate by.
It is their ball and chain that they operate by, and if they've issued
us a clearance, they have some pretty tight parameters that they want
us to fly by in their airspace.

Let's say that your here at my club in Texas. My specific question here
would be how would you file the route portion. Let's say you use a fix
near TSA to start. Now, how do I file the altitude? A block is probably
the best way, as you mentioned, but how do you guarantee your local
controllers that your going to remain in that block, especially if the
bottom fills in below you while your cruising. This is why I'm a bit
suspect that there are some loose ends to flying gliders IFR, from a
totally legal standpoint.

I beg to differ that it is nothing like flying an airplane IFR.

Thanks for the input



Fox Two wrote:
> snoop wrote:
> > Good find. That's what I saw, in the same vein, with 61.57, how to stay
> > current, but the requirements for an instrument rating still leave us
> > hanging out there, as mentioned earlier. Now we need the operational or
> > part 91 end of it. How to do it. Hang in there guys, Shawn, c'mon buddy
> > we need you to help here.
> >
>
> Snoop-
>
> What are you talking about?! Ask a specific question! Flying a glider
> under IFR is EXACTLY THE SAME as flying an airplane under IFR. That is
> why an instrument rating in airplanes is required to fly a glider under
> IFR. Here's how you do it:
>
> 1. File the flight plan.
> 2. Receive the ATC clearance.
> 3. Fly the glider!
>
> If your flight is intended to be local in nature, you request a block
> clearance both laterally and vertically, and remain within your
> clearance limits. If you are flying cross country, you receive a route
> clearance with authorization to deviate up to x miles left and right of
> course within a block altitude limit.
>
> If you already have your instument-airplane rating, and a few hundered
> hours of instrument experinece, you should already know all of this.
> If you don't, then you shouldn't consider flying a glider IFR.
>
> Chris Fleming, F2

[Fox Two]

Snoop,

That's more like it: specific questions. It appears to me that you are
making this way too difficult. Here we go:

>snoop wrote:
>
> Chris,
>
> Specifically, where does the clearance begin, and end. ATC is going to
> want a starting point and an exit point.

What is your intended task? If you're going from A to B and landing at
B, then file from A to B. Most glider cross-countries start and end at
the same place, so file from A to A via B and C. You can amend your
clearance at any time. If you don't think you can make B, just tell
ATC and request clearance to C, or back to A or to a new destination D.
In short, just tell them what you want to do!

> Going back to my earlier note,
> how do you get up and down? The cloud layer closes in below you while
> your going x country IFR in a pure glider, how do you legally get down.

I'm not sure I understand your question. Your initial clearance is
going to have an altitude block. Throughout your flight, you will
amend this clearance both up and down. I've had clearances which had
8,000 foot deep altitude blocks!

> You are coming down somewhere, I don't have an argument there, but ATC
> has a big manual called the TERPS Manual that they have to operate by.
> It is their ball and chain that they operate by, and if they've issued
> us a clearance, they have some pretty tight parameters that they want
> us to fly by in their airspace.

TERPS means Terminal Instrument Procedures. Do you seriously intend to
fly an ILS in a glider? I didn't think so. Likewise, DP's STAR's and
all other IAP's are irrelevant to IFR gliders. Gliders need to depart
and arrive under VFR. TERPS doesn't apply.

> Let's say that your here at my club in Texas. My specific question here
> would be how would you file the route portion. Let's say you use a fix
> near TSA to start. Now, how do I file the altitude? A block is probably
> the best way, as you mentioned, but how do you guarantee your local
> controllers that your going to remain in that block, especially if the
> bottom fills in below you while your cruising. This is why I'm a bit
> suspect that there are some loose ends to flying gliders IFR, from a
> totally legal standpoint.

As for filing your route, just file direct. For altitude, file for
your estimated max altitude. In the remarks section, write: Glider
flight. Will require course deviations and block altitudes from ATC.

Yes, you must remain within the parameters of the clearance. So, you
shouldn't accept a clearance that you can't comply with. If you're at
5,170 feet and scratching in weak lift, do not accept an altitude
clearance that requires you to remain above 5,000 feet! Likewise, if
you've encountered unexpected sink, advise ATC that you will need a new
altitude clearance. It all comes down to COMMUNICATION!

>
> I beg to differ that it is nothing like flying an airplane IFR.

90% of flying an airplane IFR includes VMC departures and arrivals,
with only a few moments in IMC conditions. Just like a glider.

>
> Thanks for the input
>

You're welcome. Now let me add this: to safely fly a glider in IFR
conditions, the pilot must be able to walk and chew gum at the same
time. Flying a glider effectively on a cross-country is challenging.
Flying single-pilot IFR is challenging. Flying a glider on a
single-pilot IFR cross-country is extremely challenging. Prerequisites
should include many recent hours in both glider cross-countries and IFR
procedures.

At the risk of speaking for others, glider pilots that fly IFR have
huge personal weather minimums. They won't consider flying IFR unless
they are certain that they will be able to cancel IFR and continue to
their destination under VFR with a significant safety margin. Most
pilots will file IFR with no intention of ever flying into a cloud.
Instead, they want to be able to fly closer to the cloud than the
minimum distances required for VFR. Most IFR cross-countries are in
mountain waves, and the risk of going from clear and a million to
suddenly being engulfed in a thick cloud is real. Being on an IFR
flight plan is a safety measure.

Finally, nothing can substitute for good judgment. IFR in gliders can
be a valuable tool, but it can easily kill you. Don't even think of
doing it unless you are certain that there is no risk from doing it.
Actually, your criteria should be the opposite: do it only if you think
it is the safer option.

Chris Fleming, F2
ATP B-767, CFI-G

[58y]

wrote:

> No matter what you fly in general aviation accessible to an average
> pilot is difficult to fly in a cloud(s).

Single-pilot IFR in IMC is challenging in any aircraft--some more than
others. On the other hand, nobody here has yet advocated six legs ending
with circling approaches at night in snowstorms as an example of the
kind of "cloud flying" that gliders might do.


> And don't mix any glider with a 757, there is no comparison. Period.

Then you've flown both? I've enjoyed the similarities almost as much as
the differences, but maybe that's just me. The only relevant comparison
I would suggest here is that each requires the pilot to be respectful of
its limitations.


> ...I pay very close attention to the foehn gap. And if you get
> trap on top you have very unpleasant descent through a cloud(s)....
> I would not take any chances flying here, "out west" with flight into
IMC.

Excellent. Then we're in full agreement. Why ascribe any less caution to
a properly trained and equipped glider pilot flying legally in clouds in
a different environment?


> ...as a power, glider, instructor, etc. pilot, if my
> knowledge is limited I would like to update that.

That's what we're all here for, Jacek. Hopefully we can clarify what is,
and is not, legal. I suspect that the possible may already be fairly
well outlined, but I await the input from more experienced guiders of
gliders in cloud.



Jack

[58y]

snoop wrote:

> Sorry Jack but your dead wrong. There are flesh and bone reasons why we
> should teach people why we don't penetrate clouds, in US
> gliders/airspace.

Let's deal with what I wrote:

"It can be done safely, under limited circumstances, and our effort
ought to be to show people how to do it safely and legally, not to
scare them away."

When you tell folks, "Don't do it," and just walk away, you've lost your
best chance to influence their behavior in the long run. As a matter of
fact, I suspect you and I would arrive at the same point after beating
around this bush for awhile. I won't get "called in by the FAA for IFR
[sic] glider flying here in the USA," because I won't be doing any.


> With regard to wave flying, yes we get a window, and stay out of the
> clouds and ahead of the weather. I've flown the wave window at Marfa,
> where we had a window, a chunk of airspace, but still not a clearance
> into IFR [sic] conditions. The topic here is getting a clearance and going
> into solid IFR [sic].

The topic can be anything you want it to be, Snoop, but the thread is
titled "Cloud Flying".


> Your statement " it can be done safely under limited circumstances"
> won't hold up when your dancin' for the FAA.

"It can be done safely under limited circumstances" is a statement for a
NG discussion on the topic of "Cloud Flying". Legality is a different
question and one on which it is clear you are confidant you know the
answer. The FAA might even agree with you, but if they didn't they'd
never tell anyone -- you know how they are. So maybe you can point out
to us those FAR's that actually prohibit gliders from flying in clouds
in the USA under any circumstances. And then we can watch advocates from
the other side of the issue show us where their FAR's can beat up your
FAR's.

This ought to be fun....


Jack

[snoop]

Chris,

I don't want to make it difficult. What I do want is for those of us,
who want to protect our sport of soaring from, the intense scrutiny of
the public eye, and the heavy hand of big brother, to think through
this difficult subject. As seen in this thread there is a lot to this
thing we call IFR flying. I fly IFR everyday at work, all around the
world. Its wonderful, and like flying gliders, gives a lot of
satisfaction to the pilot side of the brain.

Your input has been very helpful, but to me there are still a lot of
loose ends. When I flew cargo in twin cessnas, back in the late
seventies, we filed our own flight plans with the FSS desk at DPA,
under the watchful eye of Theo Moore, the king of the local FSDO. Theo
would collect our flight plans and go over each box on that little
flight plan card to see that we met the letter of the law. For instance
if it was a day when it was lifr, he would check the validity of our
alternate, our fuel. The guy was not bashful about doing this while
standing behind the counter as we filled them in. All our pilots
received a first hand lesson in what goes in each of those little
boxes, and why. Lessons that still apply today whether filing into MKE,
or VIDP.

My point here is I'm still fuzzy on the official guys (FSS, ATC)
accepting something as simple as the flight plan for our glider as you
described. From an operational viewpoint, it's clear as a bell to me,
it's simple. I've received untold numbers of pop up clearances in the
past.

There are still MEAs, MOCAs, MVAs, things, that the contollers have to
govern who they turn loose in the clouds. How does the local guy work
around these. Again it appears quite simple from the operational end,
but.......

Then, there is local knowledge, which I'm thinking goes a long way
with glider IFR. That is what we need clarification of. And use
conservative common sense. But that term is not in the FAAs handbook.

As you well know most of these FAA regs have blood written on them. I
would have to have the controller himself tell me the TERPs are out the
window when it comes to my glider flying IFR.

What I'm hoping Shawn will do before publishing anything about IFR
glider flying is to take all of our points, sit down with his local
FSS, ATC guys, the guys who give him his clearance, and hash it out.
Maybe get Shawn, or anyone else who knows how to, no, wait, there are a
lot of people who think they know how it's done, let's get those who do
file, and fly their glider IFR, to get their local ATC/FSS people to
present a paper, or talk to the local groups, about the procedures and
responsibilities of flying our gliders IFR.

With all due respect to Shawn and his paper, these things, he has
probably done!

Your exactly right about doing it as a "safe option". We might have to
dance with the feds, after the help ATC gives us, to get us back to
VFR conditions, but we sure don't want a 340 knot mustard colored
suppositorie up the backside.

snoop



Fox Two wrote:
> Snoop,
>
> That's more like it: specific questions. It appears to me that you are
> making this way too difficult. Here we go:
>
> >snoop wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > Specifically, where does the clearance begin, and end. ATC is going to
> > want a starting point and an exit point.
>
> What is your intended task? If you're going from A to B and landing at
> B, then file from A to B. Most glider cross-countries start and end at
> the same place, so file from A to A via B and C. You can amend your
> clearance at any time. If you don't think you can make B, just tell
> ATC and request clearance to C, or back to A or to a new destination D.
> In short, just tell them what you want to do!
>
> > Going back to my earlier note,
> > how do you get up and down? The cloud layer closes in below you while
> > your going x country IFR in a pure glider, how do you legally get down.
>
> I'm not sure I understand your question. Your initial clearance is
> going to have an altitude block. Throughout your flight, you will
> amend this clearance both up and down. I've had clearances which had
> 8,000 foot deep altitude blocks!
>
> > You are coming down somewhere, I don't have an argument there, but ATC
> > has a big manual called the TERPS Manual that they have to operate by.
> > It is their ball and chain that they operate by, and if they've issued
> > us a clearance, they have some pretty tight parameters that they want
> > us to fly by in their airspace.
>
> TERPS means Terminal Instrument Procedures. Do you seriously intend to
> fly an ILS in a glider? I didn't think so. Likewise, DP's STAR's and
> all other IAP's are irrelevant to IFR gliders. Gliders need to depart
> and arrive under VFR. TERPS doesn't apply.
>
> > Let's say that your here at my club in Texas. My specific question here
> > would be how would you file the route portion. Let's say you use a fix
> > near TSA to start. Now, how do I file the altitude? A block is probably
> > the best way, as you mentioned, but how do you guarantee your local
> > controllers that your going to remain in that block, especially if the
> > bottom fills in below you while your cruising. This is why I'm a bit
> > suspect that there are some loose ends to flying gliders IFR, from a
> > totally legal standpoint.
>
> As for filing your route, just file direct. For altitude, file for
> your estimated max altitude. In the remarks section, write: Glider
> flight. Will require course deviations and block altitudes from ATC.
>
> Yes, you must remain within the parameters of the clearance. So, you
> shouldn't accept a clearance that you can't comply with. If you're at
> 5,170 feet and scratching in weak lift, do not accept an altitude
> clearance that requires you to remain above 5,000 feet! Likewise, if
> you've encountered unexpected sink, advise ATC that you will need a new
> altitude clearance. It all comes down to COMMUNICATION!
>
> >
> > I beg to differ that it is nothing like flying an airplane IFR.
>
> 90% of flying an airplane IFR includes VMC departures and arrivals,
> with only a few moments in IMC conditions. Just like a glider.
>
> >
> > Thanks for the input
> >
>
> You're welcome. Now let me add this: to safely fly a glider in IFR
> conditions, the pilot must be able to walk and chew gum at the same
> time. Flying a glider effectively on a cross-country is challenging.
> Flying single-pilot IFR is challenging. Flying a glider on a
> single-pilot IFR cross-country is extremely challenging. Prerequisites
> should include many recent hours in both glider cross-countries and IFR
> procedures.
>
> At the risk of speaking for others, glider pilots that fly IFR have
> huge personal weather minimums. They won't consider flying IFR unless
> they are certain that they will be able to cancel IFR and continue to
> their destination under VFR with a significant safety margin. Most
> pilots will file IFR with no intention of ever flying into a cloud.
> Instead, they want to be able to fly closer to the cloud than the
> minimum distances required for VFR. Most IFR cross-countries are in
> mountain waves, and the risk of going from clear and a million to
> suddenly being engulfed in a thick cloud is real. Being on an IFR
> flight plan is a safety measure.
>
> Finally, nothing can substitute for good judgment. IFR in gliders can
> be a valuable tool, but it can easily kill you. Don't even think of
> doing it unless you are certain that there is no risk from doing it.
> Actually, your criteria should be the opposite: do it only if you think
> it is the safer option.
>
> Chris Fleming, F2
> ATP B-767, CFI-G

[Bill Daniels]

I've done a bit of cloud flying in your neck of the woods in single engine
airplanes but this story could apply to gliders as well.

I had departed White Sands Regional under a IFR flight plan to Houston
Hobby. Favorable tailwinds were available above 17,000 and there was a
towering CU sited just at Pinion VOR suggesting that those tailwinds might
be available to me. The WX forecast clearly stated that there was strong
capping at 400MB so I didn't expect towering CU's to develop into
thunderstorms. I contacted Albuquerque Center with this request, "9238J
requests climb to FL180 while holding at Pinion VOR".

ABQ center approved the request so I put on oxygen and centered the lift
below the 12,000' cloud base in a standard rate turn and started the climb.
Even a slow turn of 2 minutes per 360 can affect the inner ear if continued
long enough so I was careful to set trim and power to make the airplane as
stable as possible. (Note to instrument rated pilots: holding doesn't
actually require that you fly a "racetrack" pattern as long as you stay
within your clearance limits.)

The rate of climb increased to 1500 FPM at cloud base and the little Piper
soared to the flight levels allowing me to cruise to east Texas with a 50
knot tailwind. I got a cruise clearance FL180 to FL 240 so I could do a
little porpoise flying. There were many other towering CU's along the route
so I did a few "diversions for weather" to traverse them. I kept a constant
watch on weather advisories lest thunderstorms develop.

I figure that utilizing lift saved about 20 gallons of avgas on that flight.
Since the flight was conducted far above the operating ceiling of the Piper,
I see no reason that a glider couldn't have made the same flight.

While IFR/IMC flight in glider is both possible and legal with the right
equipment and training, it must be said that the skillset required is quite
large and the task is very demanding. Many very experienced instrument
pilots regard single pilot IFR in airplanes inadvisable due to the cockpit
workload. Adding the mind share needed to soar to that workload makes for a
formidable task.

I'm interested in glider IFR flight as much as any one. However, I think I
would keep it to IFR flight under VMC in low traffic areas. For example,
access to airspace above FL180 to permit a climb to the very high CU bases
that sometimes develop in the western US.


Bill Daniels

"Fox Two" > wrote in message
ps.com...
Jacek,

I'm anxiously awaiting the article as well! Until it is, though, here
are some tasty morsels:

There aren't any FAR's that clearly say: "To fly a glider under IFR,
you must..." But there are some regs that we can correlate together to
find that, yes, flying a glider under IFR is completely legal. Such
as:

There is no instrument rating available for gliders, as is specified by
CFAR § 61.5(b)(8):

§ 61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part.
b) The following ratings are placed on a pilot certificate (other than
student pilot) when an applicant satisfactorily accomplishes the
training and certification requirements for the rating sought:
(8) Instrument ratings (on private and commercial pilot certificates
only)-
(i) Instrument-Airplane.
(ii) Instrument-Helicopter.
(iii) Instrument-Powered-lift.


But, CFAR § 61.3(e)(3) states that a pilot can get certified to fly a
glider under IFR:

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
an airplane instrument rating.


And, CFAR § 61.57(c)(2) specifies the recent pilot experience needed
to act as PIC in a glider under IFR:

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
(c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless within the
preceding 6 calendar months, that person has:
(2) For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in a glider,
performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions-

(i) At least 3 hours of instrument time in flight, of which 1 1/2 hours
may be acquired in an airplane or a glider if no passengers are to be
carried; or
(ii) 3 hours of instrument time in flight in a glider if a passenger is
to be carried.


Furthermore, CFAR § 61.57(d)(1)(iii) specifies how a glider pilot can
get an instrument competency check:

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
(d) Instrument proficiency check. Except as provided in paragraph (e)
of this section, a person who does not meet the instrument experience
requirements of paragraph (c) of this section within the prescribed
time, or within 6 calendar months after the prescribed time, may not
serve as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than
the minimums prescribed for VFR until that person passes an instrument
proficiency check consisting of a representative number of tasks
required by the instrument rating practical test.
(1) The instrument proficiency check must be-
(iii) For a glider, in a single-engine airplane or a glider.


As far as inspections are concerned, CFAR § 91.413(a) does not exempt
gliders from the 24-month transponder inspection requirement:

§ 91.413 ATC transponder tests and inspections.
(a) No persons may use an ATC transponder that is specified in
91.215(a), 121.345(c), or §135.143(c) of this chapter unless, within
the preceding 24 calendar months, the ATC transponder has been tested
and inspected and found to comply with appendix F of part 43 of this
chapter.


But the altimeter inspection required by CFAR § 91.411 only applies to
airplanes and helicopters:

§ 91.411 Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and
inspections.
(a) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled
airspace under IFR unless- <snip>


Equipment requirements to certify your glider for IFR flight are
determined by the manufacturer, and the FAA. If you certify your
glider with an Experimental Airworthiness Certificate, you will need to
comply with your certificate's limitations, just like any other
experimantal aircraft.


As far as the procedure for receiving your IFR clearance is concerned,
you can use any approved method, there aren't any special procedures
for gliders.


And, FYI, I just visited the Schempp-Hirth factory last week where I
saw a beautiful new IFR-certified Ventus with a US registration. Yes,
it's legal.

Chris Fleming, F2





wrote:
>
> Yeah, IFR it is....I am very curious about that article, will you
> include all the FAR's and AIM's for glider flight in IMC? How about
> xponder check out every 24 months? How about the instrument rating? Is
> one available for a glider? And yeah, how about the clearance? Do you
> get a pop-up clearance or , since you are not flying from controlled
> airport simply have a void time? I would like to be educated in all of
> those aspects.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacek
> Washington State

[Fox Two]

snoop wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I don't want to make it difficult.

Then don't. I was a freight dog, too. I always had to watch
everything with a magnifying glass to make sure I was legal to the
letter. I understand your mindset. But this isn't that.


> My point here is I'm still fuzzy on the official guys (FSS, ATC)
> accepting something as simple as the flight plan for our glider as you
> described. From an operational viewpoint, it's clear as a bell to me,
> it's simple. I've received untold numbers of pop up clearances in the
> past.
>

You're right. FSS/ATC may not have ever received an IFR request from a
glider before. But they will likely be excited to do something
different. Once I'm on the frequency, I quickly become a celebrity.
The controllers are asking me questions purely out of curiosity, and I
get funny one liners like:

ATC: American 325 climb and maintain 17,000, expect further climb in 20
miles, you have traffic at 11 o'clock 15 miles at FL190, a glider.

AMR325: What the h*&% is a glider doing up there?!

Me: Descending!

My point is that controllers will work with you if you work with them.
Fitting a glider into their traffic flow can be a burden to them, so
make it less so. Stay away from busy airways. If you need to transit
a busy airway, you may need to wait for a few minutes for ATC to make
room. Then when you're cleared to proceed, cross the airway quickly so
they can use it again. If they need an altitude that you've currently
got blocked, if you can, release it back to them to get the transient
through. Let's all just get along.

> There are still MEAs, MOCAs, MVAs, things, that the contollers have to
> govern who they turn loose in the clouds. How does the local guy work
> around these. Again it appears quite simple from the operational end,
> but.......

You're scaring me, snoop! Gliders aren't operating anywhere near the
MEA! Use some judgment here.


> As you well know most of these FAA regs have blood written on them. I
> would have to have the controller himself tell me the TERPs are out the
> window when it comes to my glider flying IFR.

Snoop, TERPS apply to terrain & obstruction clearance during departure
and arrival. We're not doing that. We are thousands of feet off the
ground with cloudbase being thousands of feet above the ground. We're
not flying low IFR; we're flying into an isolated cloud, or flying
along the edge of a lenticular.

> let's get those who do
> file, and fly their glider IFR, to get their local ATC/FSS people to
> present a paper, or talk to the local groups, about the procedures and
> responsibilities of flying our gliders IFR.

What do you think we're doing? Perhaps you should take a break from
typing, and reread the entire thread. Your questions have been
answered. IFR in gliders in legal, and people do it every day.

Here's my recommendation to you, snoop. You already know that you
learned more on your first night flying freight out of Chicago than you
did in all of your previous training. So, take an IFR-equipped glider
and fly it IFR in VMC conditions. Take your normal tow, release, and
climb several thousand feet. Then call up ATC, pick up an IFR
clearance to maneuver in the vicinity. Explore the cloudbase, but
don't go into the cloud (for safety). Then cancel IFR, and go home.
Viola! IFR in gliders. Small steps.

Chris Fleming, F2

[[email protected]]

58y wrote:
> wrote:
>
> > No matter what you fly in general aviation accessible to an average
> > pilot is difficult to fly in a cloud(s).
>
> Single-pilot IFR in IMC is challenging in any aircraft--some more than
> others. On the other hand, nobody here has yet advocated six legs ending
> with circling approaches at night in snowstorms as an example of the
> kind of "cloud flying" that gliders might do.
>
>
> > And don't mix any glider with a 757, there is no comparison. Period.
>
> Then you've flown both? I've enjoyed the similarities almost as much as
> the differences, but maybe that's just me. The only relevant comparison
> I would suggest here is that each requires the pilot to be respectful of
> its limitations.
>
>
> > ...I pay very close attention to the foehn gap. And if you get
> > trap on top you have very unpleasant descent through a cloud(s)....
> > I would not take any chances flying here, "out west" with flight into
> IMC.
>
> Excellent. Then we're in full agreement. Why ascribe any less caution to
> a properly trained and equipped glider pilot flying legally in clouds in
> a different environment?
>
>
> > ...as a power, glider, instructor, etc. pilot, if my
> > knowledge is limited I would like to update that.
>
> That's what we're all here for, Jacek. Hopefully we can clarify what is,
> and is not, legal. I suspect that the possible may already be fairly
> well outlined, but I await the input from more experienced guiders of
> gliders in cloud.
>
>
>
> Jack

Jack,


> > And don't mix any glider with a 757, there is no comparison. Period.
>
> Then you've flown both? I've enjoyed the similarities almost as much as
> the differences, but maybe that's just me. The only relevant comparison
> I would suggest here is that each requires the pilot to be respectful of
> its limitations.

I have not flown 767....but I have flown 737-300 and -400 in which I am
rated and some .

What worries me in here is the fact that most of opinions expressed in
this posting are greatly simplifying flight in a glider while IMC. I
used to fly my 182, prior to that in 177RG and prior to that in
Cherokee Archer III in solid IFR...well, I was getting out of the plane
exhausted. When I added a simple S-TEC system 30 autopilot with
altitude hold things did improve dramatically. But flying a Cessna or
737 is not the same as flying any glider.I witnessed in 1983 a pilot
getting into Cumulonimbus in a Foka....he came out of the cloud in
pieces. I also happen know the regs. I am also a CFI, -G and -II....can
I fly in IFR conditions in a glider if I must (like if flying the wave
and you get a solid undercast)..I sure can, will I do it for
pleasure...no way.

What I am trying to say is that by giving some ideas to less
experienced pilots will lead to problems of all kinds of magnitude.

Thanks,

Jacek
Washington State

[snoop]

Fox Two wrote:
>
> You're right. FSS/ATC may not have ever received an IFR request from a
> glider before. But they will likely be excited to do something
> different. Once I'm on the frequency, I quickly become a celebrity.
> The controllers are asking me questions purely out of curiosity, and I
> get funny one liners like:
>
> ATC: American 325 climb and maintain 17,000, expect further climb in 20
> miles, you have traffic at 11 o'clock 15 miles at FL190, a glider.
>
> AMR325: What the h*&% is a glider doing up there?!
>
> Me: Descending!

Chris, this is the exact reason I'm still looking for the technical
answers. You just made about every working pilot reading your celebrity
dialouge, pass out. "11o'clock 15 miles", your descending out of who
knows what exact altitude, and the big boy is climbing toward you, this
would wake everyone up. I would venture that the captain on that AA
flights' first thought would be, "we're turning now", then he would ask
the center about the accuracy of the gliders' altimeter.
>
> You're scaring me, snoop! Gliders aren't operating anywhere near the
> MEA! Use some judgment here.
>
Chris, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you mean
that your not doing this near an airway. MEA is an altitude, and
although you may be flying in the Flight Levels, MEA's do run from
down in the thousands to the flight levels.
>
>
> Snoop, TERPS apply to terrain & obstruction clearance during departure
> and arrival. We're not doing that. We are thousands of feet off the
> ground with cloudbase being thousands of feet above the ground. We're
> not flying low IFR; we're flying into an isolated cloud, or flying
> along the edge of a lenticular.

Chris, I will concur that we're not flying low IFR, and we won't be
doing ILS approaches, although I have a glider accident in mind, where
the pilot did try to penetrate some LIFR weather and lost. He lived,
but there was a lot of serious head scratching on his part. The answers
I'm looking for, the fundamental, basic answers we need are, how do I
explain my right to be at 19,000ft with an airliner bearing down on me,
(your scenario), to the fed that meets me on the ramp after the part
121 captain calls this in. Your a professional pilot, what are your
words to all the basic, specific, fundamental, IFR pilot/equipment
questions that your going to face?

>
>What do you think we're doing? Perhaps you should take a break from
> typing, and reread the entire thread. Your questions have been
> answered. IFR in gliders in legal, and people do it every day.
>
Chris, I'm not convinced, and saying people do it everyday, well let's
just say I think all USA clubs need to get the donuts out and talk this
one up. I know there are people in clubs who can get this discussion
going.

> Here's my recommendation to you, snoop. You already know that you
> learned more on your first night flying freight out of Chicago than you
> did in all of your previous training. So, take an IFR-equipped glider
> and fly it IFR in VMC conditions. Take your normal tow, release, and
> climb several thousand feet. Then call up ATC, pick up an IFR
> clearance to maneuver in the vicinity. Explore the cloudbase, but
> don't go into the cloud (for safety). Then cancel IFR, and go home.
> Viola! IFR in gliders. Small steps.
>

Chris I would love to turn on a t&b and climb into the cloud, but I
want to know that my bases are covered! I want the blessing of the
people who would otherwise fry me, and you! It would be fun just to be
the celebrity kind of pilot, and forge ahead, but I've found in my
world it's been more enjoyable, to find out the facts, do it right, and
let the feds go after the uninformed.

Later, I'm off to the soaring club!

[Fox Two]

snoop wrote:

> Chris, this is the exact reason I'm still looking for the technical
> answers. You just made about every working pilot reading your celebrity
> dialouge, pass out. "11o'clock 15 miles", your descending out of who
> knows what exact altitude, and the big boy is climbing toward you, this
> would wake everyone up. I would venture that the captain on that AA
> flights' first thought would be, "we're turning now", then he would ask
> the center about the accuracy of the gliders' altimeter.

Oh, for God's sake, snoop. You're really beginning to annoy me. If
you fly IFR as much as you say you do, you hear that every day.
Aircraft A receives a hold down clearance until he is clear of traffic
B above. American was thousands of feet below me, climbing to an
altitude two thousand feet below me. He saw me on his TCAS. There was
no conflict. ATC was providing separation. Everybody was happy.
Geez.


> Chris, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you mean
> that your not doing this near an airway. MEA is an altitude, and
> although you may be flying in the Flight Levels, MEA's do run from
> down in the thousands to the flight levels.

Snoop, we aren't navigating airways! In fact, no navigation equipment
of any kind is required to fly IFR! You need to stop thinking like a
135/121 airplane pilot. You're in a GLIDER. The world of aviation is
a big place, and most pilots are only familiar with their little slice
of it. You need to think outside of your box.

Scroll up to my first message; I've referenced the exact regs that
legalize IFR gliders. It is legal. Period.

My final case-in point: The Goodyear Blimp flies IFR over football
games all of the time. There are tens of thousands of people who are
first-person eye witnesses to this fact as they watch the blimp fly in
and out of the clouds on a snowy day. Millions more see this on TV.
I'm sure that one or two of those fans is a fed. The pilot of the
blimp is getting paid. It's a commercial operation with passengers on
board. But there is no requirement for that pilot to have an
instrument rating of any kind. He might be 1,000 feet AGL, definitely
below the lowest minimum IFR altitude for airplanes. He's IFR without
a rating, and he's perfectly legal. It's a big world out there, snoop.
The rules that apply to airplane 135/121 don't apply to all other
types of flying.

Going out to the glider club? That's sounds good. I'll join you.

Chris Fleming, F2

[snoop]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> >I would venture that the captain on that AA
> >flights' first thought would be, "we're turning now", then he would ask
> >the center about the accuracy of the gliders' altimeter.
>
> Why would he question that when he'd just received a report
> that the glider was at FL 190 and presumably on an IFR
> flight plan and in communication with ATC?
>
> Todd, welcome aboard. Thanks for your input. To answer your question I would have to say, given the altitudes in Chriss' scenario, there would be cause for alarm due to the small difference in the altitudes, and closure rate. Not knowing the accuracy of the story gliders altimeter, I would, if I were driving the large aircraft tell myself that a thirty degree turn off this heading won't hurt anyone .

Is the glider pilot flying off of an altimeter set at zero, or is he
flying GPS altitude, and if he is flying with his altimeter set at
29.92, how far out of tune is his old altimeter that may not have seen
the bench since it was new? Don't know, food for thought, I hope. What
I do know is that altimeters that have not been bench checked in a
while can be waaay off.

I just came from our club, where I talked with one of our members who
has a beautifully installed xponder, with encoder, and all the paper
work to go with it. We also looked at the poh list of approved
equipment.

Going back to Chris's scenario, if the controller had told me that the
glider traffic had an encoder and they had verified his altitude during
his climb, I might feel better, but I cant see this guy, unless he has
a xponder, so I'm still going to make a nice little deviation around
the traffic. I think the more realistic scenario is yours where your in
a window and the possibility of ever coming closer than five miles is
far fetched.

Todd, with regard to your flight where you had 10,000ft separation,
I'm guessing you were flying in a wave window. Would also like to ask
if you use a transponder. Thanks for your input.



> --
>

[snoop]

> Oh, for God's sake, snoop. You're really beginning to annoy me. If
> you fly IFR as much as you say you do, you hear that every day.
> Aircraft A receives a hold down clearance until he is clear of traffic
> B above. American was thousands of feet below me, climbing to an
> altitude two thousand feet below me. He saw me on his TCAS. There was
> no conflict. ATC was providing separation. Everybody was happy.
> Geez.
>
Chris, I'm getting annoyed with this thread too. I've got a note into
Shawn, will give a report after he briefs us. Let's put someone else in
charge of stirring this pot. Todd your in charge. F2 if your in the Big
D look us up at TSA. And the 135/121 comment really cut deep! Later,
snoop
>
>
> Going out to the glider club? That's sounds good. I'll join you.
>
> Chris Fleming, F2

[Brian[_1_]]

> Is the glider pilot flying off of an altimeter set at zero, or is he
> flying GPS altitude, and if he is flying with his altimeter set at
> 29.92,

Come on Snoop you should know the answers to these. The pilot is
instrument rated and as a result has been trained to fly in IFR
airspace. He will set it to 29.92 as he is supposed to.


how far out of tune is his old altimeter that may not have seen
>> the bench since it was new?

IF flying in Class A airspace (diffenent from Cloud Flying) he will
have a Mode C Transponder that has been checked with in the last 24
months.

Don't know, food for thought, I hope. What
> I do know is that altimeters that have not been bench checked in a
> while can be waaay off.
>

Also as is standard procedure the Controll will confirm that
Transponder and the Altimeter coorsponde within a reasonable tolerance.




Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

[Fox Two]

snoop wrote:
> Chris, I'm getting annoyed with this thread too. I've got a note into
> Shawn, will give a report after he briefs us. Let's put someone else in
> charge of stirring this pot. Todd your in charge. F2 if your in the Big
> D look us up at TSA. And the 135/121 comment really cut deep! Later,
> snoop


Snoop,

I don't know where the Region 10 competition is going to be next year,
but maybe I'll see you there.

I can understand your frustration with all of this stuff, but the point
of this forum is to be able to exchange ideas. Don't take any of it as
gospel. You're putting a lot of faith into what Shawn has to say, but
he's not perfect, either. He has repeatedly said that § 61.57 doesn't
apply to single-pilot operations, but it absolutely does. CFAR §
61.57(c)(2)(i) clearly specifies that in order to act as PIC in a
glider under IFR while solo, you need to log at least 3 hours of
instrument time in the last 6 months, of which 1 1/2 must be in gliders
(the other 1 1/2 may be in either airplanes or gliders):

§ 61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
(c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless within the
preceding 6 calendar months, that person has:
(2) For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in a glider,
performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions-
(i) At least 3 hours of instrument time in flight, of which 1 1/2 hours
may be acquired in an airplane or a glider if no passengers are to be
carried.

Also, don't take everything you read in Soaring Magazine to be gospel
either. In last month's thread on this topic, we discussed Tom
Reesor's letter in the August SOARING magazine. He confidently claimed
that to fly a glider IFR one requires:

1. "The pilot to be instrument rated in single-engine airplanes and
also have a glider rating ... to fly a glider in clouds," and

2. "Gliders flying on instruments are required to have a full gyro
panel."

Neither of which is true. CFAR § 61.3(e)(3) states that a glider
pilot must have an airplane instrument rating to fly a glider IFR, but
it doesn't specify that it needs to be a single-engine class rating:

§ 61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
3) For a glider, a pilot certificate with a glider category rating and
an airplane instrument rating.

And there is no FAR whatsoever that requires a glider to have a "full
gyro panel." The only gyroscopic instrument that most glider
manufacturers require for cloud flying is a "Turn & Bank Indicator with
Slip Ball."

So what do you do? Read the regs for yourself. I've referenced the
exact FARs to back up everything that I have said. Read your glider's
manual. Is your glider approved for cloud flying? If your glider has
an experimental certificate, read your operating limitations. Did the
FAA approve your glider for cloud flying? And, has your glider
received all of its required inspections?

If, after all of this you have determined that you meet all of the
requirements to fly your glider IFR, you're legal to do so.

So how do you do it? Personally, I don't file a flight plan. I only
use IFR as a tool to climb into the Class A airspace, and I never know
if the mountain wave above El Paso is good enough until I'm airborne.
My climb to 17,000 feet is VFR with El Paso Approach Control, and if
I'm still climbing strong, I'll request a handoff to Albuquerque Center
and request an IFR climb with them. They first verify my transponder
code, position and altitude, then ask for my intentions. I request
altitude blocks in 4,000 foot increments, so the first clearance that I
receive is from 16,000 to FL 200. As I climb and descend, ABQ shifts
the block up and down. My mountain wave flights have all been local in
nature, so my lateral clearance is defined by radials and distances
from El Paso VOR, which I have programmed into my GPS. When I descend
through 17,000 after my wave flight, I cancel IFR. I have never had
any difficulties. In fact, the controllers have always been more than
helpful.

As a side note, I have never, nor do I ever intend, to fly a pure
glider in a cloud. I'll wait for my Nimbus-4DM to arrive before I do
that. Now where's that lottery ticket?

Chris Fleming, F2

[Graeme Cant]

snoop wrote:

> Chris I would love to turn on a t&b and climb into the cloud, but I
> want to know that my bases are covered! I want the blessing of the
> people who would otherwise fry me, and you! It would be fun just to be
> the celebrity kind of pilot, and forge ahead, but I've found in my
> world it's been more enjoyable, to find out the facts, do it right, and
> let the feds go after the uninformed.

Chris sounds pretty informed to me and you sound like you're a natural
bureaucrat with a check pilot background. Thank God you weren't on my
seniority list.

You're not looking for information - you want to stop HIM doing it!

If you don't want to do it - DON'T DO IT! Now let it go.

GC

[Graeme Cant]

snoop wrote:

> ...Let's put someone else in
> charge of stirring this pot. Todd your in charge.

Nobody's in charge here!!!

Geez! I thought I'd left management pilots behind years ago!

GC

[5Z]

snoop wrote:
> Chris, this is the exact reason I'm still looking for the technical
> answers. You just made about every working pilot reading your celebrity
> dialouge, pass out. "11o'clock 15 miles", your descending out of who
> knows what exact altitude, and the big boy is climbing toward you, this
> would wake everyone up. I would venture that the captain on that AA
> flights' first thought would be, "we're turning now", then he would ask
> the center about the accuracy of the gliders' altimeter.

So Snoop, just by replacing the word "glider" in the above exchange
with "your favorite trustworthy aircraft", your whole attitude would
change?

Explain exactly why hearing the work "Lear" for example would make you
feel better?

I'm sure there's a few rotting away at airports that are marginally
airworthy, and might even have an owner who flew IFR 20 years ago, and
is just itchin' to go fly......

Bottom line - if the glider is on a clearance we MUST assume the glider
will behave just as any other aircraft. Because if we don't, then how
on earth can we assume any one of the other aircraft will behave as
well?

This whole discussion is about SOARING in clouds. Except in the
mountains, this means there WILL be a decent clearance between ground,
VMC, and cloudbase. The glider pilot is not concerned with terrain,
because in this situation it IS NOT AN ISSUE. If it were, the glider
pilot likely would not fly. You are clouding the issue by insisting
the glider operation take place at 500' AGL in fog directly over the
tower at DFW.

What we are talking about is operation at say, 6,000' AGL and above in
the middle of Kansas. The only issues are about what is required to be
legal to continue circling up into that nice towering cu. And once
topped out at FL200, the glider pops out the side, then continues on to
the next nice cloud in VMC. The glider pilot has, at all times, the
option to change course and descend if asked by ATC. The controller
and glider pilot COMMUNICATE, and establish an understanding that it
may be possible that the glider will hit sink, but in that case, there
is always the option to change course to stay clear of any traffic
below the glider.

As others have posted, flight in IMC without an autopilot can be
difficult and tiring. The glider is only using the cloud to thermal
up, then glide out the side in order to spend as little time in cloud
as possible. This XC flight has no need of any fancy navigational
equipment beyond a compass, as the pilot is planning to be VMC 95% of
the time.

-Tom
CFIG, PVT ASEL with about 150 hours in airplanes, no instrument
experience, and not planning to fly into clouds anytime soon.

[Stefan]

5Z wrote:

....
> -Tom
> CFIG, PVT ASEL with about 150 hours in airplanes, no instrument
> experience, and not planning to fly into clouds anytime soon.

Funny that despite your non existing experience and intention, you seem
to be the only one who actually understands what cloud flying in gliders
is all about.

Stefan

[Jack[_5_]]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>>> Chris I would love to turn on a t&b and climb into the cloud, but I
>>> want to know that my bases are covered!
>
> Graeme Cant wrote:
>> You're not looking for information - you want to stop HIM doing it!
>> If you don't want to do it - DON'T DO IT! Now let it go.
>
> Come on Graeme - ease off. For U.S. glider pilots the
> interface between IFR flights and gliders is a tricky thing
> to get right and there are a lot of pitfalls.

I agree with Graeme, in that the negative attitudes expressed in this
thread have consisted primarily of vague warnings, half-informed scare
tactics, and bluster from those who appear to think their ATP's give
them special insight into cloud flying in gliders, while the
constructive posts have tended to come from glider pilots, some of whom
also have a lot of varied flight experience but lack the arrogance. It's
the holier-than-thou attitude that is the most annoying and the least
informative.

Cloud flying in gliders in the US is poorly understood and grossly under
appreciated. The sport could benefit significantly from cloud flying
when properly trained and flown, but as it is the FAA and the SSA have
paid far too little attention. As a result, I must agree with Todd that
the legal pitfalls are substantial. This thread is a small part of
beginning to change USA soaring for the better.


Jack

[snoop]

Jack wrote:
> > Cloud flying in gliders in the US is poorly understood and grossly under
> appreciated. The sport could benefit significantly from cloud flying
> when properly trained and flown, but as it is the FAA and the SSA have
> paid far too little attention. As a result, I must agree with Todd that
> the legal pitfalls are substantial. This thread is a small part of
> beginning to change USA soaring for the better.
>
Jack, where have you been. Jack has summed up the point of this thread
in his last paragraph. "The legal pitfalls are substantial". Bingo.
This was a good walk through the problem. Like we've done many times
over beers at TSA, right Jack. I love you man! Are you bringing the PIK
for Labor Day?

One thing I have to dispell, and disagree with my old friend Jack, and
a couple others. I'm the furthest thing from a "bureacrat". I've never
been a check airman, other than flying with guys doing their first
crossing, or introduction to a new plane. I am the other items
described, an atp, instrument, all that other stuff. So are the four
other working atp/mechanic/pilot types at my club working in the hangar
as we speak on rebuilding another tow plane, or the two very busy
atp/cfig's who do the most instructing at our club. But this
conversation was'nt about who's resume is bigger. This was about the
search for facts.

I know what Jack means by some pilots and their 'holier than thou
attitude". But that wasn't didn't figure in the equation here. Learjet,
757, who cares, we need to look at the numbers. Chris gave us a
scenario to look at. Put Clutch Cargo and his pals Spinner and Paddle
Foot in what ever aircraft is in the scenario, it doesn't matter. Uh,
oh, I think I just gave away my age.

I'm now visiting with Shawn, on the email. Look forward to visiting
with him when he gets back to the states. He's currently putting it on
the line over in Iraq. Weekends here, let's fly!
>
snoop(mick)

[snoop]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
>
> I see where you're going, but would you ask these questions
> about airplane traffic that was pointed out? Remember that
> the glider is in Class A. Either he's in a wave window
> (American's pilot is probably not even familiar with them
> unless he's also a glider pilot) and there is an assigned
> block of airspace that's being kept clear of other IFR
> traffic, or he's on a IFR flight plan and is being treated
> like all other IFR traffic. Either way, the controller is
> responsible for IFR/IFR separation in the CAAS and there's
> no real reason to question the glider's altimeter over that
> of any other traffic - is there?
>
Todd, let's say the heavy airplane pilot, let's call him Clutch, is
issued traffic, another airplane, let's say in the same position as the
glider in F2s' scenario, "11 o'clock and 15 miles'. Clutch would most
likely not say another word, other than "traffic in sight" if he picked
him up visually. Because, both airplanes are equipped with Mode S
xponders, and ACAS II rev. 7 TCAS (traffic conflict alert system)
equipment. They can see each others position relative to their own and
their altitude, and it even tells Clutch whether the other guy is
climbing or descending, on their TCAS. Also both airplanes, in todays
world are most likely RVSM(reduced vertical separation minima)
certified, which means that above Flight level 290, up to, I believe
it's up to FL430 now, we operate with only 1000 foot of vertical
separation between aircraft. To receive that certification the
aircrafts static system, pitot, and even the skin around each of those
items has to pass rigorous tests.

> > Todd, with regard to your flight where you had 10,000ft separation,
> >I'm guessing you were flying in a wave window.
>
> Yes.
>
> >Would also like to ask if you use a transponder.
>
> No, but there are times I'd like to have one.

Todd, that's why Clutch asked for the thirty degree turn in the
scenario! Thanks for the input! Now snoop is heading to the glider port
to put the glider together for tomorrows fun!
>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> T o d d P a t t i s t - "WH" Ventus C
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

[Andy[_1_]]

snoop wrote:
TCAS (traffic conflict alert system)


TCAS is "Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System"

Andy

[5Z]

snoop wrote:

> him up visually. Because, both airplanes are equipped with Mode S
> xponders, and ACAS II rev. 7 TCAS (traffic conflict alert system)
> equipment. They can see each others position relative to their own and
> their altitude, and it even tells Clutch whether the other guy is
> climbing or descending, on their TCAS. Also both airplanes, in todays
> world are most likely RVSM(reduced vertical separation minima)
> certified, which means that above Flight level 290, up to, I believe
> it's up to FL430 now, we operate with only 1000 foot of vertical
> separation between aircraft. To receive that certification the
> aircrafts static system, pitot, and even the skin around each of those
> items has to pass rigorous tests.

Wow, I didn't realize ALL those aircraft built 30, 40 or 50 years ago
have been upgraded and meet these requirements.

Snoop, there's a lot of old airplanes up there that are probably in
worse shape to fly IFR than some sailplanes...

-Tom

[Chris Reed]

5Z wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>
> This whole discussion is about SOARING in clouds.
> What we are talking about is operation at say, 6,000' AGL and above in
> the middle of Kansas. The only issues are about what is required to be
> legal to continue circling up into that nice towering cu. And once
> topped out at FL200, the glider pops out the side, then continues on to
> the next nice cloud in VMC.

This has been a fascinating discussion, but this post from 5Z is the
only one which actually made any sense to me.

I don't come from the Land of the Free but from over-regulated UK. To
fly in clouds I make sure I'm not in danger of entering controlled
airspace, call on 103.4, and if no-one answers that they're in the same
cloud I climb into it. No instrument rating, nothing but my own
assessment of whether I can do it safely. That's our law. I'm sure
there's an offence of reckless flying (or equivalent), but I'm prepared
to defend my decision so off I go.

Now, if 5Z could tell me how to straighten up and pop out of the side,
rather than blundering about on strange ellipses and eventually sinking
out of the bottom, I might be able to make use of cloud climbs.

What does concern me is this fear of the regulations. OK, I'm a lawyer,
but that just means I know that there's no certainty in any laws. My
view is that if it's not specifically outlawed, and you think that it's
safe and a desirable thing to do, then you should just do it. No
prosecutor brings a case if there not a better than 50/50 chance of winning.

If we're going to restrict ourselves to what's completely risk free, why
are we flying? And if any of us stop doing what is, more likely than
not, legal in our countries, some regulator will use that as an excuse
to stop us doing it in future because there's no demand for it.

What's wrong with you guys? Was the Boston Tea Party for nothing? If you
meet the FAR requirements and want to fly in clouds, why aren't you
doing it?

[Jack[_1_]]

snoop wrote:

> Jack wrote:

>>> Cloud flying in gliders in the US is poorly understood and grossly under
>> appreciated.


> Jack, where have you been....

> I love you man!

Yeccch!

You've obviously mistaken me for someone who...well, never mind. But, I
am not the Jack you're looking for. Note the difference in email
addresses and respect for good ol' heavy metal american-made flyin'
machines.


Jack

[snoop]

My apologies. Thought you were my old friend Jack out of Clovis, a Pik
driver. I did notice, at your suggestion, your email address. Baron?
Nah my buddy JACK is more of Beech 18 kinda guy, no Barons. Barons are
for pilots who say yeccch. Zoom!

Jack wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>
> > Jack wrote:
>
> >>> Cloud flying in gliders in the US is poorly understood and grossly under
> >> appreciated.
>
>
> > Jack, where have you been....
>
> > I love you man!
>
> Yeccch!
>
> You've obviously mistaken me for someone who...well, never mind. But, I
> am not the Jack you're looking for. Note the difference in email
> addresses and respect for good ol' heavy metal american-made flyin'
> machines.
>
>
> Jack

[Jack[_1_]]

snoop wrote:

> My apologies. Thought you were my old friend Jack out of Clovis, a Pik
> driver. I did notice, at your suggestion, your email address. Baron?
> Nah my buddy JACK is more of Beech 18 kinda guy, no Barons. Barons are
> for pilots who say yeccch. Zoom!

Ahh, yes -- the email address thing -- it's a short and boring story. I
should change that some day -- never had a Baron. Got a little bit of
time in BE-18's but not enough in that bull ring to make me more than a
lowly Banderillero -- one fire and one engine failure worth. With some
of those old fly-by-night mail/freight operations, that could have been
about a week's worth of flying, of course. Took me eight long months.

Only time I've ever been to Clovis was for gunnery in the AT-33 -- nice
little boondoggle that was part of FAC training for SEA. Glad to hear
the SpecOps people going into Cannon will help keep the town alive a
little longer. Your buddy should have pretty good soaring weather in
Clovis, though, compared to NE IL this year.

If you're up around Chicago, come out west of town about 50 miles and
fly with us:

<http://www.windycitysoaring.org>

-- if it ever quits raining.



Jack

[snoop]

Hinckley, I believe? The first dollar earned flying, was towing with
the 150hp C150 for Al Freedy and the gentleman who owned the property,
Mr. Bastian, I believe. Whenever I'm in town visiting family, I usually
stop in. Miss the area, in the summertime!

Jack wrote:
> snoop wrote:
>
> > My apologies. Thought you were my old friend Jack out of Clovis, a Pik
> > driver. I did notice, at your suggestion, your email address. Baron?
> > Nah my buddy JACK is more of Beech 18 kinda guy, no Barons. Barons are
> > for pilots who say yeccch. Zoom!
>
> Ahh, yes -- the email address thing -- it's a short and boring story. I
> should change that some day -- never had a Baron. Got a little bit of
> time in BE-18's but not enough in that bull ring to make me more than a
> lowly Banderillero -- one fire and one engine failure worth. With some
> of those old fly-by-night mail/freight operations, that could have been
> about a week's worth of flying, of course. Took me eight long months.
>
> Only time I've ever been to Clovis was for gunnery in the AT-33 -- nice
> little boondoggle that was part of FAC training for SEA. Glad to hear
> the SpecOps people going into Cannon will help keep the town alive a
> little longer. Your buddy should have pretty good soaring weather in
> Clovis, though, compared to NE IL this year.
>
> If you're up around Chicago, come out west of town about 50 miles and
> fly with us:
>
> <http://www.windycitysoaring.org>
>
> -- if it ever quits raining.
>
>
>
> Jack

[Jack[_1_]]

snoop wrote:
> Hinckley, I believe? The first dollar earned flying, was towing with
> the 150hp C150 for Al Freedy and the gentleman who owned the property,
> Mr. Bastian, I believe.

That's right.

The _last_ dollar I earned flying was towing at 0C2, during the last
season that Hinckley Soaring was in operation. Hinckley Soaring put a
lot of pilots into the air in gliders over a thirty-year span, but all
good things must come to an end. Al is now a very valuable addition to
our club, but I miss being able to soar during the week. ;)


Jack