[NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers

[Earl Haury]

Right - and be very careful (or keep mouth shut) when dealing with the 
press. An innocent interview at a pattern meet might have answers like "no 
more than 60 deg at those poles out there"  or "we try to fly smoothly at 
constant speed - slow & quiet  is good" won't make the news. But a casual 
comment that "some screaming jets exceed 200mph & reach 3000 ft. in seconds" 
will be on the news in a heartbeat! Minimize everything with the press if 
you say anything at all.

Earl
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave" <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers


> ...ahem.....the answer is always "about 400' max"......
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Keith Hoard
> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 9:16 AM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers
>
> Then you need to ask him how he measured the height of your maneuvers.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 9, 2010, at 5:52, Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Only until someone in the FAA enforcement division happens to see an R/C
> airplane performing one of the tall maneuvers; then all hell will break
> loose.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> On Sep 9, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Tim Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> The fact is, if passed it'll be ignored as usual.
>>>
>>> --- On Wed, 9/8/10, John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers
>>> To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:29 PM
>>>
>>> The fact that we are having this discussion only proves the point that 
>>> we
>>> have no real way of determining, in real time, how high we are.  We are
>>> guessing.  If the 400 foot gets to be a HARD limit we are really 
>>> screwed.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill's
> Email
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 8:50 PM
>>> To: scott at rcfoamy.com; General pattern discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers
>>>
>>>  Sorry, FAA AC 91-57 says 400 feet, period. When within 3 miles of an
>>> airport you need to contact the airport.
>>>
>>> The AMA Safety Code reads 400 feet within 3 miles of an airport and to
>>> contact the airport. AMA added a comma which changed the whole meaning.
>>>
>>> FAA is now writing new rules that will affect us, to what extent remains
>>> to be seen.
>>>
>>>
>>> AC 91-57 wording:
>>> Do not fly model aircraft higher than 400 feet above the surface.
>>> When flying aircraft within 3 miles of an airport, notify the airport
>>> operator, or when an air traffic facility is located at the airport,
>>> notify the control tower, or flight service station.
>>>
>>>
> http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
>>> 1acfc3f689769a56862569e70077c9cc/$FILE/ATTBJMAC/ac91-57.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>> AMA Safety CODE:
>>>
>>> 3. I will not fly my model aircraft higher than approximately 400 feet
>>> above ground level, when within three (3) miles of an airport without
>>> notifying the airport operator.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/8/10 6:37 PM, scott at rcfoamy.com wrote:
>>> > > From Greg at ama it is as the 1981 FAA advisory stated 400 feet agl
>>> within 3 miles of a CONTROLED airport.
>>> >
>>> > If flying within 3 miles the airport has to be notified as they do for
> the
>>> sailplane events at the NATS.
>>> > Scott
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion