"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
"Ivan Kahn" wrote:

Todd, I think we are beginning to mix the question of is an outlanding an
emergency an when should an emergency be declared. Please see below:

I don't see any mixture, but I'll try to make my points
clear.

1) An outlanding required by lack of lift is legally an
"emergency" under the FAR's which justifies deviating from
any FAR to the extent required by safety.

I appeciate your view, but I disagree, an outlanding is not an emergency. If
you find that you need to deviate from an FAR, no matter what the reason,
that would be an emergency.


2) An intentional landing in the same field, where not
required by lack of lift is not an "emergency" under the
FAR's and does not justify deviating from the FAR's.

Agree, since one could choose not to land,


3) There's no requirement to "declare" an emergency, but you
should communicate whenever you think it will improve
safety.

To the extend that we consider the words delcare and communicate to mean the
same thing, I agree. But one can certainly have an emergency without
communicating, which is what I meant when I used the word declare. Sorry for
that confusion.


The point I am trying to make is that IF you view an outlanding as an
emergency,

I don't think your attitude is relevant.

That was not atittiude, your original reponse seemed to me to miss the point
I was trying to make and so I was trying to highlight the operative word
which is that if, by defination an outlanding is viewed as an emergency that
some undersible FAA views might then follow.


then the FAA will rightly take a dim view of any pilot who
routinely put themselves into such a position.

If I understand you, you are advocating not calling it an
"emergency" so the FAA will look on us kindly? IMHO, if the
FAA objected to outlandings, they would do so no matter what
the pilot thought about it.

I do not believe it to be an emergency to begin with. My statement is that
if it were then the FAA would take a dim view of outlanding as a standard
practice since glider pilots would be engaging unsafe practices.


"Declaring" an emergency is
certainly recommended if you need to deviate from the FARs. .

I see no advantage to making any kind of formal declaration,
except where needed to obtain some assistance. Even then,
I'd probably just advise of my problem and ask for the
assistance I wanted.

Assuming you are not requesting assistance, then I agree but by declaring
you will alert others to your problem and also have it on record should the
FAA question you later/


Again, see above - if every outlanding is by definition an emergency the
FAA
will take a dim view of that.

Baloney. They don't care what we *think* it is - they care
what it really is.




In your example, declaring an emergency in this case is needed because
you
need to deviate from an FAR - but not because you are simply landing out.

So whether it's an "emergency" depends on whether you need
to break a rule? That's ridiculous. You get to break the
rule *because* it's an emergency, not because you made some
radio announcement or because you wanted to beak the rule.
Whether a pilot is in an emergency condition does not depend
on his radio declaration.


I think you are trying to read a lot more into what I have said then exists.
The beginning and ending of my view is that an outlanding is not, by
definition, an emergency.

Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)