![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 7, 7:29*pm, Andy wrote:
The stupidity of the situation is that 66 would be 100 points better off if he had a logger failure than if he announced his intention to abandon the task, made a completely legal class C overflight, *and then turned in his log. I have to correct that - the score would have been the same since failure to turn in a log would get zero for the day and the additional 100 point penalty. Andy |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for
the day. Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote:
As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course, impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the practical circumstance. John Cochrane |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane
wrote: On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote: As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course, impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the practical circumstance. John Cochrane This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. Mike |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 17:36 08 September 2010, Mike the Strike wrote:
This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. And since no one is mentioned it yet, it is perfectly legal to overfly a Class C without a transponder and without being in radio contact with the tower, as long as you are above 10000 ft MSL. This is a fairly common move in the western half of the US... Marc |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 12:08*pm, Marc Ramsey
wrote: At 17:36 08 September 2010, Mike the Strike wrote: This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. And since no one is mentioned it yet, it is perfectly legal to overfly a Class C without a transponder and without being in radio contact with the tower, as long as you are above 10000 ft MSL. *This is a fairly common move in the western half of the US... Marc Marc beat me to that. And before anybody challenges him please carefully read 14 CFR 91.215. This seems to be a common point of confusion. But it would be much better if people actually have transponders near Class C or B airspace to begin with. I am not commenting on whether what the contest rules should or should not allow overflight. I can see a reason for now wanting contestants to try to overfly the top of class C or 10,000 MSL and fall into it. And personally (since John stirred the pot there) I would hope that if the SSA is going to run contests near Class C airspace then maybe they ought to consider the need to require transponders in gliders (ouch I can hear keyboards being pounded out there...). Darryl |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I absolutely agree with the SSA Board's zero-tolerance attitude
towards rules violations. On the other hand, there are controlled, restricted, and/or prohibited areas in every contest envelope I've flown in and we routinely assign tasks that require us to exercise our piloting abilities to remain clear of this closed airspace. Thanks to GPS loggers, enforcement is easy, as evidenced by Rule 10.12.1 "Tasks should be set to avoid flight through closed airspace or areas of high-density traffic." This somewhat nebulous guidance gives the CD the flexibility to set tasks even when a straight line between two specific points within turn area cylinders passes through such airspace. An airspace infraction is easy to spot on the trace and the consequences for busting this rule are straightforward and dire. The expansion of closed airspace to include all airspace above it is, as our Rules Committee reps have said, a simple way to deal with attempts to cross closed airspace that fail due to sink or miscalculated glides. However, I have to take issue with the reasoning that anyone questioning whether this rule ought to be changed for flights involving a return from an abandoned task is championing leniency for violations. As far as I'm concerned, an FAA airspace violation during a flight that originates from a contest launch should be penalized the same whether it's outbound on the scorable portion or inbound on the non-scorable return portion. What's different is the pilot's incentive to shave the margin a little more closely in the pursuit of speed points on the scorable portion. Yeah, one could argue that a pilot might push a little farther before turning around and then be compelled to fly just as aggressively to return before legal sunset (or a storm) and thereby be incentivized to take chances with airspace but, in the words of one of our Rules Committee guys, that seems pretty remote. I think we should explore allowing a pilot to overfly Class C and other closed airspace on the way home after abandoning a task if it's legal without a transponder or radio contact. I realize this opens the door to "well, if it's legal for him to go over, why not let me go through 'cause I've got the required equipment and expertise and it doesn't give me any extra contest points." But so be it. Let me ask a different question: would an aero retrieve be permitted to overfly a Class C on the way back to the contest site without penalty? I hope so. Yet that flight is also clearly in the scope of an SSA sanctioned contest. How about a motorglider that lands part way around, then launches again and motors back, overflying a Class C in the process? As long as I'm making trouble, let me offer the notion that practically speaking, there may be a solution on days such as the one described here in Rule 5.6.2.4 "Closed airspace is considered closed at all times, except as specifically announced by the CD." As I read this, a CD could announce on a questionable day that it was OK to overfly closed airspace returning from an abandoned task. Speaking of CDs, I'm reminded of the one a few years ago who decided to go the extra mile, so to speak, and declared (as per Rule 5.6.2.3) that all the airspace UNDER the overlying layers of Class C airspace would also be closed. When queried about the fact that this excluded a few small airports as potential landing sites, the CD breezily informed the assembled pilots that there were plenty of fields available in that area if they had to land out. That this CD was related to the owner of a local fiberglass repair shop was not thought to be a factor in this ruling. ![]() Chip Bearden ASW 24 "JB" USA |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 12:36*pm, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane wrote: On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote: As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course, impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the practical circumstance. John Cochrane This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. Mike I'm still trying to get a sense of whether "this was a real problem" or whether this is some hypothetical question. The SSA contest report says this was an area task from El Tiro to Amado, southwest of Tucson, with a 25 mile circle around Amado. The direct courseline to Amado doesn't intersect the Tucson class C, though it does come close; the Tucson class C is east of courseline. Looking at the chart, I would have flown the line of high ground even further west of courseline, ending up at Keystone peak or thereabouts. My options would have been the line of airports, Ruby Star, Flying Diamond, Ryan, Taylor, all again a bit west of courseline and heading right back to El Tiro and the second turnpoint. I just don't see how anyone could have gotten stuck behind the Tucson class C. And it looks like the CD did a good job of setting a course that really didn't cause a problem. So, tell the story. Where were you guys that you really felt this was the only safe option? How did you get there? Or is this all hypothetical? There is a lot of complaining around here about rules being too complicated. Carving out an exception for class C overflights in abandoned tasks is certainly going to be complicated. So it matters whether this is a real problem, or just the beginning of winter what- ifs. John Cochrane |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 5:45*pm, John Cochrane
wrote: On Sep 8, 12:36*pm, Mike the Strike wrote: On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane wrote: On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote: As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course, impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the practical circumstance. John Cochrane This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. Mike I'm still trying to get a sense of whether "this was a real problem" or whether this is some hypothetical question. The SSA contest report says this was an area task from El Tiro to Amado, southwest of Tucson, with a 25 mile circle around Amado. The direct courseline to Amado doesn't intersect the Tucson class C, though it does come close; the Tucson class C is east of courseline. Looking at the chart, I would have flown the line of high ground even further west of courseline, ending up at Keystone peak or thereabouts. My options would have been the line of airports, Ruby Star, Flying Diamond, Ryan, Taylor, all again a bit west of courseline and heading right back to El Tiro and the second turnpoint. I just don't see how anyone could have gotten stuck behind the Tucson class C. And it looks like the CD did *a good job of setting a course that really didn't cause a problem. So, tell the story. Where were you guys that you really felt this was the only safe option? How did you get there? Or is this all hypothetical? There is a lot of complaining around here about rules being too complicated. Carving out an exception for class C overflights in abandoned tasks is certainly going to be complicated. So it matters whether this is a real problem, or just the beginning of winter what- ifs. John Cochrane John, I think you've mistaken the Southwest Soaring Championships (a non- sanctioned local contest) with the Region 9 that was also held at El Tiro. The task in question was: ID Name Distance (Miles) Radius 106 106 Waterman 0.00 5.0 62 062 MtWshngt 77.13 12 012 Benson 126.93 13 013 Biospher 176.85 1 001 EL TIRO 209.27 1.0 I have a few recollections of making long final glides to El Tiro from the east. Given the distances involved a long, flat glide would occasionally get you close to the top of the Class C and in that instance going around could run you out of glide distance. Disclaimer: My recollection is decades old and based on the old ARSA configuration at Tucson IIRC. 9B |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 8, 9:25*pm, Andy wrote:
On Sep 8, 5:45*pm, John Cochrane wrote: On Sep 8, 12:36*pm, Mike the Strike wrote: On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane wrote: On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote: As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace conflict with getting home. Randy What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course, impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the practical circumstance. John Cochrane This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me) abandoned. We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and safest way home from tiger country. Mike I'm still trying to get a sense of whether "this was a real problem" or whether this is some hypothetical question. The SSA contest report says this was an area task from El Tiro to Amado, southwest of Tucson, with a 25 mile circle around Amado. The direct courseline to Amado doesn't intersect the Tucson class C, though it does come close; the Tucson class C is east of courseline. Looking at the chart, I would have flown the line of high ground even further west of courseline, ending up at Keystone peak or thereabouts. My options would have been the line of airports, Ruby Star, Flying Diamond, Ryan, Taylor, all again a bit west of courseline and heading right back to El Tiro and the second turnpoint. I just don't see how anyone could have gotten stuck behind the Tucson class C. And it looks like the CD did *a good job of setting a course that really didn't cause a problem. So, tell the story. Where were you guys that you really felt this was the only safe option? How did you get there? Or is this all hypothetical? There is a lot of complaining around here about rules being too complicated. Carving out an exception for class C overflights in abandoned tasks is certainly going to be complicated. So it matters whether this is a real problem, or just the beginning of winter what- ifs. John Cochrane John, I think you've mistaken the Southwest Soaring Championships (a non- sanctioned local contest) with the Region 9 that was also held at El Tiro. The task in question was: * ID * Name * * * * * * * * Distance (Miles) * Radius * *106 * 106 Waterman * * * * * 0.00 * * * * * * *5.0 * * 62 * 062 MtWshngt * * * * *77.13 * * 12 * 012 Benson * * * * * 126.93 * * 13 * 013 Biospher * * * * 176.85 * * *1 * 001 EL TIRO * * * * *209.27 * * * * * * *1.0 I have a few recollections of making long final glides to El Tiro from the east. Given the distances involved a long, flat glide would occasionally get you close to the top of the Class C and in that instance going around could run you out of glide distance. Disclaimer: My recollection is decades old and based on the old ARSA configuration at Tucson IIRC. 9B Well, if it's non-sanctioned, go ahead and make your own rules, or exceptions! John Cochrane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fed: Planes flying in "commercial" airspace must get GPS | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 66 | June 4th 10 12:54 PM |
(USA) US/Mexico "airspace" (boundary) files available | Tuno | Soaring | 4 | March 27th 10 07:17 PM |
On Sharing airspace with "non-rated UAV "pilots" | vaughn | Piloting | 15 | March 15th 09 04:08 PM |
"Fly Baby, you violated Class B Airspace" | Ron Wanttaja | Piloting | 27 | September 5th 07 08:30 PM |
Aviation Conspiracy: Connecticut To Get "Creamed" By Airspace Redesign Change? | Free Speaker | General Aviation | 0 | August 8th 06 02:42 PM |