I've been arguing that since the beginning of HPR under the NAR. It was misinterpreted once, where dhey did the opposite of what made sense, and it's been ignored ever since. The current distance table is EXACTLY as valid as the BATFE claim that APCP is an explosive. We're spending a LOT of $$$ to fight one in court, and IGNORING the one that WE have direct control over.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
I'm not being cute or an asshole, I'm just asking some questions to help you understand.
By the way, your messages definitely suggest you lack common sense.
Point.
That is not the only example either.
Perhaps time for a joint rule change proposal?
One good bit of news is that someone in our local FSS is writing an FAA guide for dealing with hobby rockets, from model to HPR. The guy happens to be L1 certified, so he knows the regs from both sides of the fence.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Definitely not with HPR models. Yes for things like D SD models in Houston, but that wasn't cloud cover, that was the overall haze and really tiny models on 18mm D3s. You could still see the sun and jets, you just couldn't see the @!^* rockets.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
No, it is not. FAR 101 prevents you from flying in a manner that creates a hazard. Security around the president is a tad tighter than that. ANYTHING in the air is considered a threat.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
This is a problem with GA aircraft. Often we hear them log before we see them, and hold until someone spots the plane and the RSO can tell if it's heading towards the range or if it's not a concern.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Aparantly not.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
We've done that, even photographic documentation, and they still weasel out of anything. And with the not so new anymore regs reducing the size requirement from 12" to 3", it' can be very hard to see the numbers.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
BTW, looking over some of your past postings; "many" indicate you definitely are an A$$ hole; soon to be a kill filed A$$ hole.
When did he say that?
No way. They can come and go as they wish, especially if they are 5+ miles form an airport. I will tell you though, that when we have a waiver active, we do not even see birds ;-) One guy did come by when we had our waiver, I called my number and found out he was at 1500ft and definitely in danger. The tower made sure he left though. It was pretty cool.
Normally we have private pilots circling our launch site when our launches start at 12 noon. I called our local Aircraft Control Tower and was told there was nothing anyone could do as the planes in question were outside their 5 mile area of control. So it is like the wild west.
Bottom line, no launching with aircraft in the vicinity.
Have you actually done this? What was the result? Please let us know.
Absolutely! Nothing will be done. As far as the airport people are concerned, the pilots have favor. And the FAA tends to favor the airport people instead of the local model rocket expert.
Um.. DUH let me guess. Oh wait this is *SO* difficult... Perhaps a rocket launched and almost hitting an aircraft? Maybe even through clouds? Since I am fairly certain any reasonable person can come up with a scenario like this, I have to assume you are a trouble maker or something.
Sheesh...
Because you have a relationship with your local TRACON and other FAA people and contacts? *DUH* HELLO? HELLO?
I'm sticking with thinking you as the trouble maker. Fred is reasonable. You are Jerry squared or something worse. Wow.
Without it being heard? I don't think so.
Yeah, people keep saying that, but nobody can come up with a plausible scenario. I've been a pilot for thirty years and an air traffic controller for 22 and I can't think of one either.
Well, if you could get the tail number, for what would you report them?
What NOTAM? What waiver? We're talking only of a launch requiring ATC notification, not a waiver.
Your scenario is absurd. A counter-drug operation could involve weapons fire, yet you think safety would be enhanced if rocketry is suspended for a time.
A NOTAM does not, by itself, create a restricted area or prohibited area or establish any Temporary Flight Restrictions. The NOTAM makes them aware of the operation, it doesn't require them to remain clear of the area.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required