VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-15-2012, 08:33 PM
Stalldog Stalldog is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 332
Default

I had several years of great flying when I was stationed at Eglin many years ago. Don't forget, the Eglin area is one of the busiest areas of military flying in the country. Many miles of land East and West of the base, almost to Crestview to the North, as well as a good part of the Gulf, are all part of the base and Restricted airspace for military use. You can fly safely through the area as long as you contact Eglin approach and give them your intentions.
__________________
Jim
Lenexa, KS

RV-7A
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-15-2012, 09:26 PM
Aryana Aryana is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Clark View Post
Interesting "spin" from the AOPA. They fail to mention that NOAA has a fleet of aircraft flown by people that have "aviation knowlege." Not that they are out looking for violations, they are doing research and surveys, but they sure could report something they saw. By the way, 3" N numbers are not much help against being tagged by radar.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Representative
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
The article sure made it sound like the NOAA team is on the ground, not in the air. I don't condone flying too low over any marine sanctuary, and as I mentioned, my only fear is that someone on the ground decides somehow that an aircraft is too low (based on what, I don't know) when they are in fact in compliance with minimums and decides to "report" them.

How does radar help identify who made the violation when a steel tube/fabric airplane with no transponder or any contact with ATC from takeoff to landing violates the minimums? I am all for laws that protect our environment, but I would hope they have a better plan for enforcement than people looking up from the ground or using radar.

Maybe they're hoping all the violators will be on IFR flight plans or VFR flight following!

Personally, I encourage use of the ASRS system at NASA for pilots to voluntarily report any unintentional violations...not for exoneration, but to ensure that any and all violations are reported to the government for the safety of us all, and for the future survival of the aviation community. If we as pilots ensure that we are in compliance, then our precious government resources can be better spent on other things, and in turn the environment will not be negatively impacted.

BTW, thanks for all that you and the rest of the FAAST Team do for the aviation community John. It's very valuable and I enjoy all the great content and programs they provide.

Last edited by Aryana : 09-15-2012 at 09:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-15-2012, 11:31 PM
John Clark's Avatar
John Clark John Clark is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana View Post
How does radar help identify who made the violation when a steel tube/fabric airplane with no transponder or any contact with ATC from takeoff to landing violates the minimums? I am all for laws that protect our environment, but I would hope they have a better plan for enforcement than people looking up from the ground or using radar.
First, let me say that I'm sure NOAA has better things to do than issue altitude busts. However I'm also sure that they would report something that is really egregious. On the radar issue, it is a double edged sword, assuming that there was coverage and your mode C/S was working, you could defend a false claim by reviewing the radar records. Yes, it is recorded. But, if you do something really silly the same evidence could, of course, be used against you. Your example of a tube and fabric, no radio flight is perfectly legal if attention is paid to the airspace and clearance from people. Just remember that the average Champ/Cub is no match for a Coast Guard Helicopter.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Representative
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-16-2012, 12:42 AM
Aryana Aryana is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
Default

Certainly true! Those helicopters are few and far between though, and they are a rare sight on the coast here in N. CA. Just this week, one of the San Francisco based USCG helicopters was dispatched to San Luis County to save a disabled 185 on floats that had engine trouble and landed in the ocean. The helicopter ran low on gas for the rescue it was so far away! As an avid sailor, I always hoped they had good coverage for fast response times, but I never wanted to rely on it.

So to bring this thread back on topic, even with floats I wouldn't consider the entire ocean a potential landing field. Common sense should prevail, but this example of an aircraft getting swallowed up in only 6 foot seas (which are very common everywhere on the CA coast) shows that what may look benign from the air might prove quite treacherous when you're up close and personal with it.

If I am over water and decide not to fly high enough to glide back to shore, I at least follow the common shipping routes for a quick pick up in case of a water ditching, and always keep well over 500 feet from any ship/person.

Here's another brain teaser for you. Did you know that if a bird makes a nest in your engine cowling, it's very likely against the law for you to remove it? Almost every bird species here in CA is protected, but how do they enforce it? Eventually, we have to realize that you can't outlaw stupidity or apathy. Whether its regarding marine mammals that get spooked by careless pilots that fly too low, or people that don't value the life of an endangered animal who is just trying to survive.

/downfrommysoapbox
/threadhijack
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-16-2012, 05:26 AM
sailvi767 sailvi767 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,166
Default

Steel tube fabric aircraft aircraft have a excellent radar cross section. Depending on overall radar coverage the FAA as mentioned can tag a aircraft all the way to its destination.

George
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-16-2012, 05:58 AM
Aryana Aryana is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
Default

Therein lies the problem over a lot of the sanctuaries located over the west coast. Mountainous terrain obscures the coverage especially below 1000 feet AGL. I've done it (not over marine sanctuaries) in steel tube, metal, and composite aircraft while in contact with ATC and they pipe up real quick when the non Mode C equipped steel tube/fabric aircraft drops off their screen.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-16-2012, 06:20 AM
sailvi767 sailvi767 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana View Post
Therein lies the problem over a lot of the sanctuaries located over the west coast. Mountainous terrain obscures the coverage especially below 1000 feet AGL. I've done it (not over marine sanctuaries) in steel tube, metal, and composite aircraft while in contact with ATC and they pipe up real quick when the non Mode C equipped steel tube/fabric aircraft drops off their screen.
They are losing contact with you because of altitude not the construction method for the aircraft. Radar cross section is a composite of many factors but fabric aircraft with metal support structure and engines produce a excellent radar image. Lots of angles under the fabric to reflect radar energy.

George
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-16-2012, 09:31 AM
az_gila's Avatar
az_gila az_gila is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 57AZ - NW Tucson area
Posts: 10,011
Question

We are only talking about 4 specific marine sancturaries here that NOAA has had marked on the Sectionals....

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/flight/faqs.html

IIRC the altitude limit over the "dotted" wildlife areas on the rest of the sectional is only advisory.... Isn't that correct?
__________________
Gil Alexander
EAA Technical Counselor, Airframe Mechanic
Half completed RV-10 QB purchased
RV-6A N61GX - finally flying
Grumman Tiger N12GA - flying
La Cholla Airpark (57AZ) Tucson AZ
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-16-2012, 09:19 PM
Aryana Aryana is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
Default

Thanks for the link. Lot of really helpful info there. Curious to hear the answer on your question from some of the experts here!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-16-2012, 10:00 PM
paul mosher
 
Posts: n/a
Default Low flight over water

Don't forget marine birds are also flying low over the water. How would you like a pelican coming through your windshield?
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:54 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.