Troubling story and some questions

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission


[CFI mode]
I fly in controlled airspace all the time and rarely get permission.
Controlled airspace does not mean that you have to talk to a controller.
Class E airspace is controlled airspace and is the such best example.
The only uncontrolled airspace (in the U.S.) is class G airspace.

Wikipedia, though never authoritative, provides this (accurate)
description - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_airspace.

[/CFI mode]

Tony V. CFI-G

On Jan 8, 5:40*pm, wrote:
On Jan 8, 2:26*pm, wrote:





On Jan 8, 8:15*am, wrote:

On Jan 2, 10:10*am, J a c k wrote:

...the best course of action involves doing the right pilot-thing NOW,
declaring an emergency as soon as possible, and filing an ASRS report
promptly after the flight.

I would add a few points to amplify this basically sound logic:

1) Fly the airplane
2) Fly the airplane
3) Fly the airplane

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission to
prevent destruction of your airplane and yourself, do not hesitate. Do
what you need to do to get back to a safe flying condition. If you get
back down bellow 18k promptly it might make sense to call ATC, but I'm
not sure what real purpose it serves other than meeting some FAR on
reporting youself appropriately and that need might be better served
through some other means than a radio call. Secondly, I'm not sure why
you'd hang out above 18k long enough to make the call before decending
via spoilers, but I guess it could happen. I think I'd be too busy
flying the airplane.

The airmanship point bears repeating in this case and in general.
Whenever you are flying near a limit (controlled airspace, Vne, severe
weather, terrain!) you need to exercise extra caution and presume that
conditions outside your control (lift, sink, gusts) could conspire
against you in the least favorable possible ways. I have seen many
people fly under these circumstances assuming that those conditions
will remain within (or close to) the ranges they have personally
experienced - I think it is prudent to assume something much less
favorable and keep margins appropriate to those assumptions. This
applies as much to assumptions about expected sink on final glide and
it does to assumptions about lift near 18,000'. One needs to be very
cautious about watching climb rate when above 17,000', particularly if
carrying any significant energy in the form of airspeed.

9B

What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Let me be very clear: entering controlled airspace w/o clearance
endangers other people's lives. PERIOD. To think that this is just
some FAR technicality that you do if you feel like it is beyond me. If
you don't think you are willing or able to follow FARs you should STAY
ON THE GROUND! Remember, this is a priviledge that can be revoked.

Tom Seim- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh Tom - you are such a grumpy fellow.

I've got nothing against navigating and communicating - I do it all
the time. I think most of the people on this thread feel the same way.
I just think they are irrelevant if you don't fly the airplane first
which it the number one risk factor in Dave's scenario. It's not like
18,000 is broken to overcast with aluminum even around Reno.

Secondly, if you do the math, a pullup from Vne to spoiler speed and
back down takes aboiut a minute, unless you fart around before you pop
the boards. If I'm at Vne and rising at altitude with an uncertain
flutter margin the last thing I want to do is get my chart out, find
the ATC freq, call them up, go back and forth as they sort out who I
am and, if I have a trasponder, give me and ident code so they can
find me and give me traffic advisories. I'm in all likelihood back
below 18,000' before they even can figure it all out and do anything
to help me. Simple.

Now, if you are already talking to them for some other reason or have
a transponder, then they already know where you are and have already
routed trafffic to avoid you. Believe it or not, the controllers don't
make a sport out of seeing how close the can fly traffic together, so
they'll give gliders a pretty good clearance form traffic.BUT, if you
are already talking to them it makes sense to let them know if you are
doing something unexpected. I'd just fly the airplane first because
the risk of breaking the airplane in my judgement far exceeds the risk
of a midair.

I am prepared for your next personal attack.

9B- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It was you who removed the navigate and communicate from the
aforementioned list, not me. This certainly does imply you have
something against communicating. Busting class A by 1K ft is a BIG
deal - you have NO IDEA where the other a/c are around you.

What is distressing to me is the whole issue could be made moot by a
simple - a short - communication with ATC. Yet all I got from you and
your ilk is how much of a drag it is to talk to those guys.

This IS endangering other people - your trying to minimize that fact
will NOT change it.

Now, go ahead, tell me how safe it is to fly around class A w/o
authorization - I am ready!

Tom

wrote:
What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Ignoring all questions of law for a moment, is it *actually* more likely
to have a mid-air at 19,000ft than at 17,500ft? They don't have to keep
the traffic above 18,000ft, after all, but I don't really know what common
practice is, and especially not in that area. If the answer is that yes,
it is more likely, what are the actual odds of having one in each area?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

Add "until you have attention to spare from aviating" to #5 and "until you
have attention to spare from navigating" to #6.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Speaking only for myself, of course, but just because the story we got
sounded relatively docile doesn't mean it was that way in the cockpit.
Different people have different capacities for verbal communication under
stress. You mentioned talking to a controller while dealing with a
microburst in the mountains. I don't doubt that you're capable of handling
that well, but it doesn't mean everyone is.

I would never say that he *shouldn't* contact ATC in these circumstances,
but only that a failure to do during the emergency isn't necessarily
negligent. If he really didn't have the attention or presence of mind to
use the radio while dealing with his situation, then concentrating on the
flying is the right thing to do. I won't comment on calling them once
things had calmed down again since I really don't know about that one.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

On Jan 8, 6:09*pm, Tony Verhulst wrote:
If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission

[CFI mode]
I fly in controlled airspace all the time and rarely get permission.
Controlled airspace does not mean that you have to talk to a controller.
Class E airspace is controlled airspace and is the such best example.
The only uncontrolled airspace (in the U.S.) is class G airspace.

Wikipedia, though never authoritative, provides this (accurate)
description -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_airspace.

[/CFI mode]

Tony V. CFI-G

Tony,

Thanks for the clarification. Clearly, I ment CLASS A controlled
airspace, vs controlled airspace. Of course, this changes absolutely
everything!

Tom

On Jan 8, 7:41*pm, Michael Ash wrote:
wrote:
What part of the word "mid-air" don't you understand?

Ignoring all questions of law for a moment, is it *actually* more likely
to have a mid-air at 19,000ft than at 17,500ft? They don't have to keep
the traffic above 18,000ft, after all, but I don't really know what common
practice is, and especially not in that area. If the answer is that yes,
it is more likely, what are the actual odds of having one in each area?

Following your logic the other principals of airmanship a

5. Don't navigate.
6. Don't communicate.

Add "until you have attention to spare from aviating" to #5 and "until you
have attention to spare from navigating" to #6.

This guy was already stabilized, in control and in no immediate danger
of breaking up. Although he was, in my opinion, foolish to be flying
at Vne to begin with. He could have easily contacted Reno Approach w/o
compromising his safety. I just don't get your guy's logic; apparently
it is "We don't talk to controllers under any circumstances".

Speaking only for myself, of course, but just because the story we got
sounded relatively docile doesn't mean it was that way in the cockpit.
Different people have different capacities for verbal communication under
stress. You mentioned talking to a controller while dealing with a
microburst in the mountains. I don't doubt that you're capable of handling
that well, but it doesn't mean everyone is.

I would never say that he *shouldn't* contact ATC in these circumstances,
but only that a failure to do during the emergency isn't necessarily
negligent. If he really didn't have the attention or presence of mind to
use the radio while dealing with his situation, then concentrating on the
flying is the right thing to do. I won't comment on calling them once
things had calmed down again since I really don't know about that one.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

What, exactly, are you trying (but failing) to say? Let me guess - and
feel free to correct me if I am wrong - is it "The probability of
having a mid-air in Class A is so low that we are excused from
following FARs". I just don't recall running into an FAR the says "You
can ignore this FAR if the probability is less than xxx%", did I miss
something here?

I would never say that he *shouldn't* contact ATC in these circumstances,
but only that a failure to do during the emergency isn't necessarily
negligent.

Are you serious, or are you joking? I strongly recommend you discuss
this with the FAA and get their take on it. Don't have their phone
number? Just let me know & I will look it up!

Here a few FARs that you should review before you make this
(interesting?) call:

91.13(a) Careless or reckless operation of an aircraft.
91.135(a) Clearance
91.135(b) Communications

You might also ask them about "negligence". For your preparation, I
found this definition:

NEGLIGENCE - The failure to use reasonable care. The doing of
something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the
failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do
under like circumstances.

Please report back with their comments. You don't have any problem
with doing this, do you? Do you want me to do it for you?

Tom Seim

On Jan 8, 8:29*pm, wrote:
On Jan 8, 6:09*pm, Tony Verhulst wrote:

If you need to go into controlled airspace without permission

[CFI mode]
I fly in controlled airspace all the time and rarely get permission.
Controlled airspace does not mean that you have to talk to a controller.
Class E airspace is controlled airspace and is the such best example.
The only uncontrolled airspace (in the U.S.) is class G airspace.

Wikipedia, though never authoritative, provides this (accurate)
description -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_airspace.

[/CFI mode]

Tony V. CFI-G

Tony,

Thanks for the clarification. Clearly, I ment CLASS A controlled
airspace, vs controlled airspace. Of course, this changes absolutely
everything!

Tom


Waiter, some Lithium for my friend Tom.

Remember the original scenario. Dave finds himself at 18,200' at some
scary number of knots over Vne - IN A SPARROWHAWK. Those things weigh
like 145 pounds empty - not exactly the aircraft I want to use for
testing aeroelastic theory. He has his transponder on so ATC sees him.
He is monitoring Reno Approach so he would be aware of traffic
reporting in an area of concern to him.

So if I am Dave in that situation I'm first of all trying to not poop
in my pants. Second, I am trying to get the airspeed down quickly but
without overstresing the airplane or changing the loading in a way
that sets off flutter (a big unknown on what to do there, so more
pucker in the old sphincter). Third, I am getting the boards out as
soon as I feel safe to do so and pushing back over for the quickest
decent I can safely manage. The whole operation is maybe 45 seconds of
pure adrenaline.

So somewhere in here Dave gets to stop thinking aviate and start
thinking navigate. The stop at navigate is short (Dave knows where he
is). So now he can move on to communicate. So the relevant question
is, where does Dave make the transition from aviate through navigate
up to communicate? All while still holding his bowels. Is it the
instant he gets below Vne? While he's still maybe 30 degrees nose up
and losing airspeed? Before the zero-G push over, popping the
divebreaks for the 45-degree decent to 18,000' and below? Is is during
the decent? Is it before the pullup? Or does Dave just push forward on
the stick to get immediately back below below 18k, poop his pants, and
wait for permission to save his own life (that is, should he jump
straight to communicate - probably in falsetto).

One could also make the argument that Dave pull up, get down to a
reasonable speed, pause at 19k, call ATC and have a conversation about
what to do before going back into aviate mode for a more sedate decent
where multitasking is again fully operating for him. That might be a
reasonable course of action, but he will be spending a lot more time
in the Class A and there is probably a question about how long it
takes ATC to sort him out. If he didn't have his transponder on it
might take some time to sort out exactly where he is relative to other
traffic, whether or not he can maintain a constant altitude and
bearing given all the wave up/down, etc. If he didn't have his radio
on ATC then he'd have to locate the freq (if not committed to memory),
dial it up and establish contact all while farting around at 19k.

If he's got nerves of steel and the multitasking ability of a figher
jock making a radio call that's more informative than Tom's self-
described, micro-burst, "I'm busy" would be in order right in the
middle of the highest workload part, but I for one would give him
credit for landing with clean trousers.

Thanks for sharing with us Dave.

9B

Thanks for the clarification. Clearly, I ment CLASS A controlled
airspace, vs controlled airspace. Of course, this changes absolutely
everything!


Sorry, it's become one of my "buttons" over the years. While
administering BFRs, I've discovered that the percentage of rated pilots
who believe that you have to talk to controllers in controlled airspace
is absolutely astounding.

Tony V.

On Jan 9, 5:56*am, Tony Verhulst wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. Clearly, I ment CLASS A controlled
airspace, vs controlled airspace. Of course, this changes absolutely
everything!

Sorry, it's become one of my "buttons" over the years. While
administering BFRs, I've discovered that the percentage of rated pilots
who believe that you have to talk to controllers in controlled airspace
is absolutely astounding.

Tony V.

I don't understand why the FAA uses the term "controlled" when it
isn't controlled at all (except in the most legalistic sense). Worse,
it creates confusion w/pilots. I know the difference, but when I say
"controlled" I mean "actively controlled".

Tom

wrote:
What, exactly, are you trying (but failing) to say? Let me guess - and
feel free to correct me if I am wrong - is it "The probability of
having a mid-air in Class A is so low that we are excused from
following FARs". I just don't recall running into an FAR the says "You
can ignore this FAR if the probability is less than xxx%", did I miss
something here?

I asked about the probability of a mid-air in the two regions for two
reasons:

First, I'm genuinely curious.

Second, you're using the chance of a mid-air collision as one reason why
not calling ATC was bad. This carries with it an implicit assumption that
the probability of a mid-air was higher when he was above 18,000ft, but
there's no explanation of this assumption. I'd like to see this justified,
particularly because I'm genuinely curious.

Now, if it turns out that you're actually safer from a mid-air above
18,000ft, I'm certainly not going to start violating the class A for fun.
It obviously doesn't justify violating the class A and I never said it
did. I'd just like to know.

I would never say that he *shouldn't* contact ATC in these circumstances,
but only that a failure to do during the emergency isn't necessarily
negligent.

Are you serious, or are you joking? I strongly recommend you discuss
this with the FAA and get their take on it. Don't have their phone
number? Just let me know & I will look it up!

Here a few FARs that you should review before you make this
(interesting?) call:

91.13(a) Careless or reckless operation of an aircraft.
91.135(a) Clearance
91.135(b) Communications

You might also ask them about "negligence". For your preparation, I
found this definition:

NEGLIGENCE - The failure to use reasonable care. The doing of
something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the
failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do
under like circumstances.

Please report back with their comments. You don't have any problem
with doing this, do you? Do you want me to do it for you?

My understanding that these rules mostly go out the window in an
emergency. Finding yourself greatly exceeding Vne certainly qualifies as
one. Top priority is to stop exceeding Vne. Second priority is to get the
heck out of the class A. Third priority is to tell the controlling agency
what's going on. If priorities 1 and 2 didn't allow time for 3, that
hardly seems negligent to me.

There *may* have been negligence in exceeding Vne in the first place, I
won't comment on that. But I don't see how it's negligent to leave the
radio alone while saving the glider once that happened.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:40:06 -0800 (PST), wrote:



Secondly, if you do the math, a pullup from Vne to spoiler speed and
back down takes aboiut a minute,

Just a technical question:
In all the gliders I've flown so far Vne is identical to spoiler speed
(read: You can extend the spoilers up to Vne).

Do there really gliders exist where the spoilers cannot be operated up
to Vne?


Bye
Andreas