| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
w@ntonsoup
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: Maximum flying altitude FAA Regs... confused |
|
|
I'm just deciding which way to go (Ultralight Trike with training, Experimental Trike with Sport Pilot certificate, or Experimental Trike with Private Pilot cert). It's all new to me and I think that the low cost / high fun factor of trikes (and the fact I can store it in my garage versus paying $200/month to hangar it!) is pushing me towards a trike.
Am I correct that if I go for an ultralight unregistered trike, it can legally fly 18k ft, but if I get something that must actually pass an airworthyness test, be registered, etc., it can only go 10k ft? That's bizarre to me and I feel like I'm missing something.
I'm in Colorado at around 6k feet, so the 10k ft ceiling is very restrictive here. That's all an SLA is allowed to do, huh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
rfane
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 214
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's not the aircraft that's limited to 10K', it's the Sport Pilot. A Private Pilot can take an LSA up to 18K', on oxygen of course, if it can get there. They are in the process of changing the Sport Pilot regs., of which one of the key changes is supposed to be a ceiling of 10K' or up to 2K' AGL (above ground level). |
|
| Back to top |
|
w@ntonsoup
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I see - but that still leaves the door open for completely untrained Ultralight pilots to go to 18,000 ft, correct? That's what I'm so baffled by. |
|
| Back to top |
|
rfane
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 214
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I've never seen an ultralight flying higher than pattern altitudes. Most of the ultralight pilots are into low and slow flight.
I'm sure it's probably been done, but I wouldn't think that most ultralight engines would be capable of operating well at those altitudes. I would also seriously question the sanity of any pilot that did it. It is too frigging cold up at that altitude for open cockpits / seats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
CharlieTango
Joined: 10 Jun 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Mammoth Lakes, California
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
roger,
i used to do tours of mount whitney from above summit altitude in my challenger I
don't think i could have reached the flight levels but i could make 15k+ |
|
| Back to top |
|
w@ntonsoup
Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know someone who went about 15k in an trike, it can be done. My point is that if you go through the process, they cap you. If you skirt the FAA, the sky is (literally) the limit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
rfane
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 214
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CharlieTango wrote: roger,
i used to do tours of mount whitney from above summit altitude in my challenger I
don't think i could have reached the flight levels but i could make 15k+
Ed,
You proved my point. You are one of those I question the sanity of. :P Bet that it was colder than that return flight from Page, AZ. I recall you pointing out some of the places you have landed upon, on that flight.
Did you happen to talk with Paul from the Calgary area when we were in McMinnville? He took his CT up to 20K+. Said it was still climbing well, when he got nervous from the windows sounding like they were going to crack. Of course he has that whiz bang prop on his, that they allow in Canada. |
|
| Back to top |
|
CharlieTango
Joined: 10 Jun 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Mammoth Lakes, California
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
you would loose the bet roger,
the heater in my challenger allowed winter whitney tours in a t-shirt 8)
i didn't talk to paul. i do know however that even your ct's can make the flight levels with a little help from the sierra wave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |