Airspace Violations OLC

Mike the Strike wrote:
Ok, so every time a pilot exceeds 18,000 feet, he just adds a note
"cleared by ATC" and everything's fine!

Yes.

I don't know why there's an assumption that rule breaking is at all
widespread and that a flight outside normal airspace hasn't been done
with permission. Most of us do obey the rules, you know.

Because these flights are posted online for all to see, we the pilots
and our national organizations are indirectly responsible for what is
posted. The SSA, FAI, etc., don't want to be in the business of
policing their membership due to both the effort required and the
liability taken on.

What I, and many other responsible pilots ask, is that we all work to
keep our sport safe and out of the eyes of anyone with an agenda
against us.

When a pilot makes a questionable operation that you witness, do you
take him aside and quietly "counsel" him? It may be that what he did
was perfectly safe in his eyes, and after you hear the explaination all
is well. It may also be that he didn't realize the error and is
thankful for the concern. The OLC environment is the same, IMO.

-Tom

The point is that just because it looks like it could be illegal,
doesn't mean it is. Just because you think something is dangerous
doesn't mean it is.

Anyone who really thinks flights posted on OLC are "public" really has
an inflated opinion of our sport!

Oh forget it...

Kirk

"5Z" wrote in message
ups.com...

Mike the Strike wrote:
Ok, so every time a pilot exceeds 18,000 feet, he just adds a note
"cleared by ATC" and everything's fine!

Yes.

I don't know why there's an assumption that rule breaking is at all
widespread and that a flight outside normal airspace hasn't been done
with permission. Most of us do obey the rules, you know.

Because these flights are posted online for all to see, we the pilots
and our national organizations are indirectly responsible for what is
posted. The SSA, FAI, etc., don't want to be in the business of
policing their membership due to both the effort required and the
liability taken on.

What I, and many other responsible pilots ask, is that we all work to
keep our sport safe and out of the eyes of anyone with an agenda
against us.

When a pilot makes a questionable operation that you witness, do you
take him aside and quietly "counsel" him? It may be that what he did
was perfectly safe in his eyes, and after you hear the explaination all
is well. It may also be that he didn't realize the error and is
thankful for the concern. The OLC environment is the same, IMO.

-Tom


I have to agree with 5Z. If it looks like a reg was busted, don't post it.
The internet is not only public, it is permanent. A file can re-surface
years later when the consequences may be...unfortunate for the pilot and the
sport in gerneral. This is something that deserves respect.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels wrote:

I have to agree with 5Z. If it looks like a reg was busted, don't post it.

Whenever I've seen a flight through some class-whatever-airspace, I have
just assumed that the pilot had a simple clearance.

But maybe I'm naive. Always assume the worst, every pilot is permanently
trying to bust as many rules as he can, and the government has nothing
more urging in their agenda than to **** of the glider pilots. Just
because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're not shadowed.

Stefan

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
Bill Daniels wrote:

I have to agree with 5Z. If it looks like a reg was busted, don't post
it.

Whenever I've seen a flight through some class-whatever-airspace, I have
just assumed that the pilot had a simple clearance.

But maybe I'm naive. Always assume the worst, every pilot is permanently
trying to bust as many rules as he can, and the government has nothing
more urging in their agenda than to **** of the glider pilots. Just
because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're not shadowed.

Stefan

That's not exactly it. The vast majority of pilots do try to fly within the
rules but can nonetheless break one inadvertantly. The accidental violation
may small and not apparent until reviewing the flight trace. Unfortunately,
the authorities may choose not to 'look the other way' since a secure IGC
file is pretty 'air-tight' evidence of the violation. The careful and
prudent pilot will choose not to post a flight showing an airspace
violation.

That said, traces which on first review appear to show a violation of a rule
may in fact be legal if, for example, the pilot obtained a clearance.
That's what the OLC comment field is for - it helps avoid controversy.

Bill Daniels

wrote:
The point is that just because it looks like it could be illegal,
doesn't mean it is.

Absolutely. This discussion has degenerated in the wrong direction.

The OLC is essentially operating on the honor system, so let's all be
honorable. This means keeping an eye out for gross violations of
regulations. The disclaimer on the OLC site is meant to remind the
submitter of some responsibility to be borne. It is in OUR BEST
INTEREST to nudge some marginal flights off the web if we feel they are
detrimental to our sport.

I'm not saying we need nannies checking every flight, but it's just
common sense that if you see a flight that's questionable, you would
approach the pilot about it. If we all do this, then it won't be a
stranger making the comment.

Just because you think something is dangerous
doesn't mean it is.

No, but I would approach the pilot to ask why someting that looked to
me as dangerous was done. I expect one of three responses:

1. A description of why it was not dangerous based on the pilot's
skills, perceptions, etc.

2. An admission that a mistake was made and some lesson learned.

3. An admission that the pilot was unaware the action looked dangerous,
and now upon reflection, a lesson has been learned.

I do not expect to get a lecture on minding my own business.

In the first case above, I would learn a lesson, and in the other two
both of us would learn a lesson.

Anyone who really thinks flights posted on OLC are "public" really has
an inflated opinion of our sport!

They can be used as "evidence" against out freedon to fly. And we can
only hope that the OLC is giving us some more exposure on what can
REALLY be done in a sailplane.

-Tom

Sit back and take a deep breath!

What you are talking about are POTENTIAL airspace violations, not
PROVEN airspace violations. I have been routinely cleared thru Class B
airspace. We also have restricted airspace close by that is open to the
public on a given day (or hour), or is restricted in subsections, or is
restricted to a certain altitude. You simply can't tell if there has
been an ACTUAL violation unless you know all the particulars about the
situation. For that reason alone OLC has no business being in the air
cop business.

MOOYMMV.

Tom Seim
Richland, WA

Stefan wrote:

Airspace violations *are* my business when they cause the authorities to
enlarge that class C airspace for another 10 miles just for safety
because gliders are known not to respect airspace boundaries.

Airspace violations *are* my business when they cause ATC not to grant
me a clearance because gliders are known not to adhere to clearances.

Airspace violations *are* my business when I sit in that airliner which
hits the offending glider.

And all these things have happened to you?

Have you compared the number of violations by the mythical "Piper Cub"
which happen every year to the number of violations by gliders? Have you
examined the faulty logic in advocating an expansion of airspace that is
not respected?

You also sincerely advocate the mandatory installation of transponders
in ALL air vehicles, whether A380's or balloon-borne lawn chairs, do you
not?


Jack

5Z wrote:

Because these flights are posted online for all to see, we the pilots
and our national organizations are indirectly responsible for what is
posted. The SSA, FAI, etc., don't want to be in the business of
policing their membership due to both the effort required and the
liability taken on.

"...don't want to be in the business of policing the membership", so
let's all police the membership.

Great! I can hardly wait to become just like all the totalitarians we've
been fighting for the last 70 years.

Welcome to 2084.


Jack

Jack wrote:

And all these things have happened to you?

Sort of, yes. In the country I live, airspace is really crammed,
controlled airspace is permanently growing and over the last few years,
clearances have become harder to get. Our only chance to keep reasonable
soaring possibilities is to be respected as reliable partners. It only
takes one or two cowboys to destroy the work of many years.

Have you compared the number of violations by the mythical "Piper Cub"
which happen every year to the number of violations by gliders?

Who cares?

Have you
examined the faulty logic in advocating an expansion of airspace that is
not respected?

Who cares whether it's logic or not, when it happens?

You also sincerely advocate the mandatory installation of transponders
in ALL air vehicles, whether A380's or balloon-borne lawn chairs, do you
not?

No, and frankly, I can't see any conexion.

Stefan