Acro Image

Aerobatics Server

ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [Acro] Re: IAC rules amok?? -- just another re ...

[International Aerobatic Club] [Communications] [Aerobatics Images]

Disclaimer: These aerobatics pages are developed by individual IAC members and do not represent official IAC policy or opinion.

[Usage Statistics]


ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [Acro] Re: IAC rules amok?? -- just another re ...



                


Thread: [Acro] Re: IAC rules amok?? -- just another re ...

Message: [Acro] Re: IAC rules amok?? -- just another real world solution

Follow-Up To: ACRO Email list (for List Members only)

From: Jim Nahom <califprint at earthlink.net>

Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2002 05:30:25 UTC


Message:

Hi Ron,

What would you think about putting your name on the waiver as the 
responsible party. The waiver I have my name on reads "Mr. Jim Nahom 
shall ensure that both pilot and aircraft are properly certified for the 
flight" Understanding that there is no spin in Primary but also taking 
into account the background and experience of almost any CD. What would 
you say to a  Judge in court when asked why you approved an airplane NOT 
certified for intentional spins to fly in an aerobatic competition. When 
a spin is the very first building block in any aerobatic training. Me 
thinks the CD would be incompetent and thus responsible.

Jim Nahom
Chapter 49

Ron Spencer wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
>  
>
> My point is that if a pilot is to compete, it will be, (and should 
> be...as per FAR's) up to that pilot to determine what parameters are 
> safe, legal and competitive to do so.  CD's, starters, friends, 
> comrades and fellow competitors should insure that if there is doubt 
> as to the ability for a pilot to fly the routine, 
> (what-ever-it-may-be), they will communicate same to said pilot.  As I 
> do not fly a P-51 or L-39, I cannot say what is the correct parameters 
> to compete successfully.  However, common sense should rule and it is 
> up to the pilot, (again, as per FAR's) to determine what is safe for 
> his aircraft operational envelope, and that individual pilot's 
> realistic limitations.  To do otherwise is to re-write existing FAR's 
> and Pilot-In-Command responsibilities. 
>
>  
>
> Jim, Are you willing to do that?  Jim I am not picking on you, yet, 
> essentially, I am saying that the existing rules clearly govern what a 
> pilot should do and think about, as it relates to the operation of an 
> aircraft, no matter what the regime.  By trying to artificially create 
> further barriers, (which cannot but arbitrarily be implemented under 
> the current realistic limitations of a contest), we do nothing to 
> enhance safety for this sport or the long term development of IAC .  
> Like it or not, it is ultimately up to the pilot-in-command, (no 
> matter how green), to determine if they should even attempt 
> aerobatics,  much less competition. 
>
>  
>
> There are no guarantees in life, far less in aviation... only the 
> common sense of the individual pilot will allow or prevent them from 
> engaging in flight operations which they should or should not engage in.
>
>  
>
> Regards, -RS-
>
>      
>
>     Ron, you are the very first person I have ever had contact with
>     that supports this category. Just curious though, how high do you
>     think a P-51 or L-39 should start at to complete the Primary
>     sequence and finish above 1500' AGL ?
>
>
>     Jim Nahom
>
>      
>

Attachement 1: part2.html


                


© Dr. Günther Eichhorn
Retired
Email Guenther Eichhorn