Scared of mid-airs

On Sat, 06 May 2006 17:04:42 GMT, B A R R Y
wrote in
::


In my case, I'd need an airplane that could *get* to A space. G

Surely your aircraft will climb above 1,500', but you'd need to be
flying in Amsterdam in this case.



On Sat, 6 May 2006 00:42:33 +0200, "Frode Berg"
wrote in
::

A bit west of the EHGG control zone (don't remember how far west)
there is class A airspace around Schiphol extending from 1500 feet
and up.

I did not know this.

On all the definitions of various air classes I've seen, all have stated
"prohibited for VFR" on the class A airspace.

Are you sure about this?

What's the source?

Frode


"Paul Tomblin" skrev i melding
...
In a previous article, "Frode Berg" said:
Yes, and class A is prohibited for VFR.

I understand there are exceptions to that rule, especially for sailplanes
riding mountain waves.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the
usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody
thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin, interviewed in Doctor Dobb's
Journal

In a previous article, "Frode Berg" said:
I did not know this.

On all the definitions of various air classes I've seen, all have stated
"prohibited for VFR" on the class A airspace.

Are you sure about this?

What's the source?

In the Canadian regulations, it says

601.06(1) No person shall operate a VFR aircraft in Class A airspace
unless the aircraft is operated in accordance with an authorization
issued by the Minister.
(2) The Minister may issue an authorization referred to in
subsection (1) where the operation of the aircraft is in the public
interest and not likely to affect aviation safety.

In the FARs, it says:

Section 91.135: Operations in Class A airspace.

Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each person operating
an aircraft in Class A airspace must conduct that operation under
instrument flight rules (IFR) and in compliance with the following:

(a) Clearance. Operations may be conducted only under an ATC clearance
received prior to entering the airspace.

(b) Communications. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft
operating in Class A airspace must be equipped with a two-way radio
capable of communicating with ATC on a frequency assigned by ATC. Each
pilot must maintain two-way radio communications with ATC while operating
in Class A airspace.

(c) Transponder requirement. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no person
may operate an aircraft within Class A airspace unless that aircraft is
equipped with the applicable equipment specified in §91.215.

(d) ATC authorizations. An operator may deviate from any provision of this
section under the provisions of an ATC authorization issued by the ATC
facility having jurisdiction of the airspace concerned. In the case of an
inoperative transponder, ATC may immediately approve an operation within a
Class A airspace area allowing flight to continue, if desired, to the
airport of ultimate destination, including any intermediate stops, or to
proceed to a place where suitable repairs can be made, or both. Requests
for deviation from any provision of this section must be submitted in
writing, at least 4 days before the proposed operation. ATC may authorize
a deviation on a continuing basis or for an individual flight.

Note that both regulations have an "out" that allows you to operate in
Class A under VFR if you have authorization. Like I said before, I've
heard of these authorizations being granted to sailplanes trying to reach
high altitudes on mountain waves.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"We sealed our federal pact without bloodshed and without exploitation of
the weak by the strong. All it took was fairness, justice and some
compromises on both sides." - George-Etienne Cartier.

"Paul Tomblin" skrev i melding
...
In a previous article, "Frode Berg" said:
Yes, and class A is prohibited for VFR.

I understand there are exceptions to that rule, especially for sailplanes
riding mountain waves.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the
usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody
thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin, interviewed in Doctor Dobb's
Journal

On Sun, 7 May 2006 11:17:04 +0200, "Frode Berg"
wrote in ::

I did not know this.

On all the definitions of various air classes I've seen, all have stated
"prohibited for VFR" on the class A airspace.

Are you sure about this?

What's the source?

Frode


http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.3.10.2.4.20

§ 91.135 Operations in Class A airspace.
top
Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, each person
operating an aircraft in Class A airspace must conduct that operation
under instrument flight rules (IFR) and in compliance with the
following:

(a) Clearance. Operations may be conducted only under an ATC clearance
received prior to entering the airspace.

(b) Communications. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft
operating in Class A airspace must be equipped with a two-way radio
capable of communicating with ATC on a frequency assigned by ATC. Each
pilot must maintain two-way radio communications with ATC while
operating in Class A airspace.

(c) Transponder requirement. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no
person may operate an aircraft within Class A airspace unless that
aircraft is equipped with the applicable equipment specified in
§91.215.

(d) ATC authorizations. An operator may deviate from any provision of
this section under the provisions of an ATC authorization issued by
the ATC facility having jurisdiction of the airspace concerned. In the
case of an inoperative transponder, ATC may immediately approve an
operation within a Class A airspace area allowing flight to continue,
if desired, to the airport of ultimate destination, including any
intermediate stops, or to proceed to a place where suitable repairs
can be made, or both. Requests for deviation from any provision of
this section must be submitted in writing, at least 4 days before the
proposed operation. ATC may authorize a deviation on a continuing
basis or for an individual flight.

[Doc. No. 24458, 56 FR 65659, Dec. 17, 1991]

Jose,

These devices are helpful, but one must be careful that one doesn't keep
their eyeballs inside the cockpit looking at the device instead of
outside.


Absolutely. That's why the display needs to be as simple as possible and
audio alerts are a must.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Doug,

But a LOT of what happens to you is due to plain luck.


"Luck" is nothing but an expression for the probability of something to
happen.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Larry,

Those who rely upon the 'big sky
theory to PROTECT them from a MAC are playing Russian Roulette.


IMHO, your view of risk management is seriously flawed. You are asking
for zero risk, everything else is Russian Roulette, you say. However,
nothing in flying (and life) is 100-percent-risk free - there's never a
probability of zero for something undesirable to happen. The only way
to manage this risk is to look at the probability of something
happening and then decide if that probability is low enough for you to
live with it. And I guess we can all agree that there are many much
higher risks in GA flying than MACs.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Frode,

What's the source?


Personal experience. FL300 in a glider above Minden, NV, after
coordination with ATC and opening of their "wave box". Radio contact
required, too.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Sun, 07 May 2006 17:27:45 +0200, Thomas Borchert
wrote in
::

Larry,

Those who rely upon the 'big sky
theory to PROTECT them from a MAC are playing Russian Roulette.


IMHO, your view of risk management is seriously flawed.

If that were my view, I'd agree with you.

But if you had read Doug's article to which I had originally taken
exception, you'd know that it was his fallacious use of the word
'protect' that I was attempting to expose as implying the Big Sky
Theory had some ability to indemnify or guarantee any exposure to a
MAC.

B A R R Y wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2006 15:21:21 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:

On Sat, 6 May 2006 15:28:33 +0200, "Frode Berg"
wrote in ::

I know off course that seperation in VMC while flying IFR is also the
reponsability of the pilot, but A-class airspace has got to have more
traffic sep from ATC than G-class, I think we can agree on that.

Right. In Class A airspace ATC provides separation for all.


In my case, I'd need an airplane that could *get* to A space. G
ROTFL
I wonder how these people feel as they barrel along the road only
inches away from oncoming traffic...
Flying is so much safer