X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:39:22 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from wind.imbris.com ([216.18.130.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c4) with ESMTPS id 2625084 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:06:18 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.18.130.7; envelope-from=brent@regandesigns.com Received: from [192.168.1.100] (cbl-238-80.conceptcable.com [207.170.238.80] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by wind.imbris.com (8.12.11/8.12.11.S) with ESMTP id lBUG5QnC088734 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:05:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brent@regandesigns.com) X-Original-Message-ID: <4777C1C9.6070103@regandesigns.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:05:29 -0800 From: Brent Regan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: SpaceShipOne questions Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070304040508020202010403" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070304040508020202010403 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paul writes: <> I realize that Paul was "on the board" and not "on board" but he, or anyone else who knows, may be able to answer some questions about the FAA's interaction with, and regulation of, the space flights. Regarding the White Night (WK) and SS1: Do the operating limitations of either craft allow for IFR operation? Did the space flights occur after a 40 hour "test period" or were the flights part of the test? Did the White Knight need a clearance to carry SS1 into Class A airspace? Did WK and SS1 depart Edwards with a single clearance or as a "close formation" flight of two? Did SS1 need a clearance to get back (FL600 to FL 180)? Did SS1 have a transponder? DME? GPS? Did the FAA just throw up its arms and grant a block altitude from FL180 to FL600? The FAA is manned by bureaucrats and bureaucrats love rules. It would seem that there is nothing in the regs that would prohibit the SS1 flights but that does not mean the FAA welcomed the unique experience. Perhaps the regional FSDO is used to "unusual" flights. It would be interesting to hear how they regulated the flights of extraordinary experimental aircraft. Regards Brent Regan --------------070304040508020202010403 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paul writes: <<when WE flew SS1 to space >>

I realize that Paul was "on the board" and not "on board" but he, or anyone else who knows, may be able to answer some questions about the FAA's interaction with, and regulation of, the space flights.

Regarding the White Night (WK) and SS1:

Do the operating limitations of either craft allow for IFR operation?
Did the space flights occur after a 40 hour "test period" or were the flights part of the test?
Did the White Knight need a clearance to carry SS1 into Class A airspace?
Did WK and SS1 depart Edwards with a single clearance or as a "close formation" flight of two?
Did SS1 need a clearance to get back (FL600 to FL 180)?
Did SS1 have a transponder? DME? GPS?
Did the FAA just throw up its arms and grant a block altitude from FL180 to FL600?

The FAA is manned by bureaucrats and bureaucrats love rules. It would seem that there is nothing in the regs that would prohibit the SS1 flights but that does not mean the FAA welcomed the unique experience. Perhaps the regional FSDO is used to "unusual" flights.  It would be interesting to hear how they regulated the flights of extraordinary experimental aircraft.

Regards
Brent Regan
 --------------070304040508020202010403--