Timeline for Why can't sonic booms be heard at air shows?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2019 at 5:46 | comment | added | Michael Hall | Fair enough, I respect your apparent knowledge on the subject. I have heard that the brass generally won't defend a pilot against an FAA flight deviation though, so you are correct in that the net effect is transparent to a line pilot. | |
| Nov 25, 2019 at 0:32 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | "mostly" means you follow orders, or stand at account for not doing so. The benefit of an agreement instead of legislation is that this gives top Pentagon brass a range of discretion to a) initially implement the agreement in a sensible manner that allows planning, and b) deviate from the agreement where exigencies require. This is why it's good that it's an agreement and not legislation. All of this is "above the pay grade" of a line pilot. | |
| Nov 25, 2019 at 0:27 | comment | added | Michael Hall | Please describe what you mean by "mostly", specifically in the context of an individual military pilot's understanding of a requirement to follow FAA regulations regarding a prohibition against supersonic flight, and any consequences, (or lack thereof) for failing to comply. | |
| Nov 25, 2019 at 0:18 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | When I say "policy" I mean the policies set as a result of the agreement between the armed serviceS and FAA that they would follow ATC (mostly). news.google.com/… As a result of the agreement, Congress did not mandate it with legislation. in actual implementation, it is at the services' discretion, but they have to make a good showing of it if they don't want Congress to intervene. | |
| Nov 25, 2019 at 0:01 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | @MichaelHall I never said it's at the discretion of individual pilots. If others did, take it up with them. I am not them. My "they" pronoun referred to your statement "the military", and in my thinking, military is plural because you have to enumerate "Army Navy Air Force Marines" otherwise you're including Coast Guard. | |
| Nov 24, 2019 at 23:46 | comment | added | Michael Hall | You said "they don't need to follow civilian system, they just do as a matter of policy". While the Pentagon is certainly not within the jurisdiction of the FAA, the fact that the military requires their pilots to follow all applicable FAA regulations renders your point completely moot. You and others make it sound like we have a choice in the matter, and could fly supersonic without consequences if we wanted. So yes, I have a problem with that so far. | |
| Nov 24, 2019 at 22:06 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | @MichaelHall It sounds like I've pushed a hot button for you. You seem to be swerving out of your way to misinterpret what I said. I am claiming you, as a line pilot, must - must - follow ATC, because of orders to that effect. I'm saying those orders flow from high up on your chain of command, i.e. Pentagon. Any problem with that so far? | |
| Nov 24, 2019 at 20:03 | comment | added | Michael Hall | It is a big leap from a detailed explanation of waivers, special use airspace, etc. to an unqualified statement that military pilots don't have to comply with FAA regulations. Roughly 75% of our flying was IFR in the national airspace system. You'd better believe we were required to follow the rules, flight violations are a career killer! Speak with authority on computer programming if that is your specialty, but don't condense someone else's answer into an authoritative sounding summary unless you are able to provide some context for clarity. | |
| Nov 24, 2019 at 16:14 | comment | added | Notts90 | @Michael I would imagine this question aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/12401/… | |
| Nov 23, 2019 at 19:06 | comment | added | Michael Hall | @Harper, please declare your credentials for making such a claim. I flew in the military for 20 years and I don’t think you know what you are talking about. | |
| Nov 23, 2019 at 0:30 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | They don't need to follow civilian system, they just do as a matter of policy, because of Hughes 706. | |
| Nov 23, 2019 at 0:04 | comment | added | Michael Hall | @Vladimir, The military definitely does need to follow civilian FAA rules. Some aircraft have waivers for speed, and of course 250 can be exceeded in special use airspace, but otherwise most of the same rules apply. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 22:29 | comment | added | reirab | @Skyler Even civilians can get the 250 below 10,000 speed restriction waived by ATC. It's mostly just there to make traffic deconfliction easier. If ATC has other ways to guarantee no traffic conflicts (and, for the Space Shuttle, they definitely did,) then there's no problem with waiving the speed restriction. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 20:20 | comment | added | Vladimir F Героям слава | @Skyler Military does not need to foloow civilian rules. One is GAT, one is OAT. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 18:45 | history | edited | Harper - Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 71 characters in body
|
| Nov 22, 2019 at 18:42 | comment | added | Skyler | Does that mean that it's illegal to have an aircraft with a higher landing speed than 250KIAS? I know some extreme aircraft (e.g. the Shuttle) land at very high speeds. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 15:18 | history | edited | Harper - Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 406 characters in body
|
| Nov 22, 2019 at 15:04 | history | answered | Harper - Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 4.0 |