At 02:52 06 March 2014, Tony wrote:
On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 7:23:00 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Buy a 1-26 and go after the 1-26 records. Those are national records
to=
o and they are quite breakable . This way you don't have to buy a
pressur=
e suit or a $500,000 glider...
=20
=20
=20
Best Regards,
=20
=20
=20
Daniel Sazhin
=20
=20
=20
I guess I'm just curious how it got to this point. The rules for state
r=
ecords say you need to take off within the state (you can land across
state=
lines) you are claiming the record in. Seems like it used to be a
require=
ment that for a US record you should take off within the country where
the
=
record was claimed. Seems like a reasonable distinction to have US and
OUS=
categories.

I've always wondered the same thing about geography. It's been discussed
he=
re before, particularly after Fossett and Enevoldson. I think someone
menti=
oned then that some countries do keep geographic as well as citizenship
bas=
ed records.=20





The British system is British National Records (the FAI sanctioned ones)
can be set by a British Citizen flying anywhere in the World. Many years
ago the BGA , recognising that most pilots couldn't afford to go record
chasing in South Africa, the American South West, Australia and all the
other places where the weather is much better than the UK, created a second
set, UK Local Records; these can be set by a pilot of any nationality on a
flight starting within the defined boudaries of mainland UK.

All of the British National Records currently listed were set outside the
UK, except the gain of height and absolute altitude records, which were set
in Scotland and are the only ones on both lists.

I think that system is a very good idea and fair to all parties.