Keep in mind the FAA is a big bureaucracy ... left hands often do not speak with right hands, never mind front and rear hands. My current contact is the third in four years. A common feedback wrt airspace inaccuracies is "We are aware of that and it's in our queue to fix. Look for it by release x." A common example is ways through or around restricted airspace -- e.e.g. the VFR "tunnels" through airspaces in Nevada and New Mexico, which you can find on sectionals but not in the NFD.

I haven't made an effort to confirm but I suspect that the NFD often keeps you out of airspace you can actually fly in, and never allows you in places you can't fly in.

Of course the irony that the GC airspace was created to reduce noise should not be lost on us. Perhaps we should be lobbying for a complete exemption for gliders.

My second point applies to pleasure flights and record attempt flights. The second point is that the digital depiction is a gross oversimplification that is effectively robbing us of precious airspace to the extent that we try to rely on the airspace file. Most of what is depicted in the file as surface to 14,500 is actually surface to 9000 or surface to 10,000.

Since we could not safely fly in the below 9K / 10K areas there anyway, the reality is that the airspace rules in those sectors don't have much pertinence to our operations. Only about a quarter of the GC airspace is actually surface to 14,500 which is pertinent.

I tend to agree that for a contest it's probably not worth the hassle. But for fun flying it's nice to have the GC airspace outlined - heads up to get and stay above 14,500'.

We don't need a glider busting through the Canyon airspace scratching out of a hole!

Parowan09 SUA, as rendered by Cambridge Aero Explorer only shows the outline of the GC flight rules area and does not show the various sectors inside that boundary.

My version of the file has no line breaks so it's too much of a pain to try to read what data is actually included.

WInscore only suggests penalties but does not apply them. You could probably do what you suggest but the arguments that would ensue if someone, perhaps the winner, descends into the charted airspace may not be worth the hassle.

I think you'll find that that the special flight rules area is defined by SFAR 50-2.

The NFD file is almost certainly some clerk's attempt to digitaly encode that regulation. I was unable to find any evidence that the coordinates specified in SFAR 50-2 have changed since it was first published. The still current government chart is, I think, over 10 years old.

If the digital depiction is being changed I would assume it is to correct errors.

Note also that although the SFAR defines a large area with a top at 14,500 it goes on to specify that 14,500 does not apply to the whole area and defines various sectors with lower minimum flight altitudes. This is all shown on the chart but my recollection was that this detail is not in the digital data (please correct me if I have remembered that wrong as I don't have the files or the chart here).

In any event the current chart is approved for navigation and any digital representation derived from the NFD file is only for VFR situation awareness and not for navigation, unless the processing and display device is approved for that purpose.

I don't know of any glider digital map display that has an approval level that allows it to replace a current chart.

Andy

I was referring to rule 5.6.2.4: "Closed airspace is considered closed at all times, except as specifically announced by the CD."

I realize this is probably gaming the rules, but it seems that gives the CD leeway to declare some airspace "not closed" - which would be viable if the South Rim was a area turnpoint and the forcast was for lift above 17999' - as long as part of the area was clear of the GC airspace.

I seem to remember a 500k contest task in the past - South Rim, Yarnell, Turf; GW, TS1 and I had a great day chasing each other.

Probably a moot point, Winscore may not allow it!

Anyway - check your .sua files on SeeYou to make sure they match the latest Sectionals (which are available online free) - good way to make sure you have all the little "gotchas" out there - including the border with Mexico.

Cheers!

Kirk
66

The GC airspace depicted in SUA files from justsoar.com exactly reflect the area(s) according to the FAA. (The NFD is the only digital airspace source "approved for navigation purposes".) The scorer at Parowan used an SUA file provided by justsoar.com for the contest. But what SUA file(s) the ASA scorer uses this year is an entirely different question :)

I have seen several graphical representations of the GC no-fly zones, in the form of raster images on web pages and printed charts, that differed from the digital (NFD) version and each other.

Flight in the GC special rules area is not permitted with or without a transponder (except for tour operators that have appropriate authorization).

It is my interpretation that the GC special rules airspace is closed under SSA rules. Use of a south rim turmpoint would require an area task which would place the burden of avoiding the airspace on the contestant.

This interpretation seems to be in complete agreement with the interpretation used at the last Parowan regional.

Be aware though that the GC airspace is more complex than depicted in some SUA files. You need to have the special grand canyon chart to see how it is really set up.

Andy

(Reading rules is for people with time on their hands!)