[wingspan33]

A few days ago I happened to give a call to the US Parachute Association. I had questions about the legality of the basic B.A.S.E. Jumping Rig.

Well, kind of by surprise, I was very respectfully put through to the Executive Director's Office. His name is Ed Scott and he's a great guy with an obvious expertise in the field of parachutes.

Well, near the end of our conversation I asked Mr. Scott (thinking I might be about to insult him) if he would define parachutes as "Aircraft". He came back with a swift and certain "No." In responding, I described how similar modern parachutes are to paragliders, and on the important points he agreed. The most obvious difference between the two objects is dimension, number of lines, minor control differences - otherwise they are the same.* In consideration of our brief discussion I came to the realization that, in talking with this inflatable canopy expert and authority, paragliders - for the same reasons - would not be definable as aircraft!

I no longer feel as if I have to be "politically correct" on this subject. As in patting the slow child on the head and saying "Aren't you the smart boy!". The Executive Director of the US Parachute Association made me feel confident about being straight forward and honest. Paragliders are NOT Aircraft.





*How each object is normally "deployed" is also quite different.

[JoeF]

http://lowres.cartoonstock.com/animals-hang_glider-hang_gliding-hang_gliders-eagle-bird-gra100702_low.jpg
Image seems highly copyrighted. Not sure.

[Rick Masters]

The BASE-jumpers' perspective
http://www.basejumper.com/forum/BASE_Ju ... s_P2879882

[JoeF]

aircraftairplaneairworthy.JPG (133.38 KiB) Viewed 5277 times

? aircraft
? airplane
While a PG is collapsed, it seems then not to be an aircraft, as one does not intend to have flight in that collapsed bundle. If, during the fall of the non-aircraft, one can manage to reformat the system of parts to be an aircraft then one would then again have an aircraft. Being in the air falling with a bundle of collapsed fibers has its special risk level. Kiting or balloon spiders manage often to have enough fibers in the air to continue their species; many are lost to birds, fire, and other unfortunate ends. Many humans falling with inadequate lift from their fibers have a tough time continuing their species. Getting out of a collapsed non-aircraft and into the aircraft format again after some falling is something accomplished sometimes; but sometimes the reformatting is not achieved on time to save the day.

[Rick Masters]

does not intend to have flight in that collapsed bundle

Actually, it is vertical flight - like a helicopter, just in the opposite direction. It is also the most natural form of human flight, as I have stated previously and read many times in comments and articles by soaring parachutists who seem unaware that hang gliding ever existed. I guess if you can put it in your trunk, its more natural than on a roof rack (but I always had room in my trunk with a hang glider). And it is Darwinian.

[Rodger]

Anything that falls under FAR Part 103 is not an "aircraft" but more specifically an "ultralight vehicle."



PART 103--ULTRALIGHT VEHICLES

Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 45-1 [Note]

Subpart A--General
Sec.
103.1 Applicability.
103.3 Inspection requirements.
103.5 Waivers.
103.7 Certification and registration.

Sec. 103.1 Applicability.

This part prescribes rules governing the operation of ultralight vehicles
in the United States. For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle
is a vehicle that:
(a) Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a
single occupant;
(b) Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only;
(c) Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate; and
(d) If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds; or
(e) If powered:
(1) Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety
devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic
situation;
(2) Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons;
(3) Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full
power in level flight; and
(4) Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated
airspeed.

[Bill Cummings]

I wish to expunge from the United States Hawks Hang Gliding Association the use of the terms: cling glider, grasp glider, hand glider and ultralight.
The only exception would be while in communication with the FAA.
All letters to the FAA should refer to a hang glider as a hang glider followed by:
(AKA by the FAA’s misnomer ultralight)

[Bob Kuczewski]

Good to see you Rodger!!!     

Anything that falls under FAR Part 103 is not an "aircraft" but more specifically an "ultralight vehicle."

Part of the confusion in this case is that the City of San Diego has its own definition of "Airports" and "Aircraft" which are not consistent with the FAA. I would think that the FAA's definitions would trump the City of San Diego in matters governing airspace, but it's not clear who's definitions would have precedence on the ground.

Here's a section of the San Diego Municipal Code from Chapter 6: Public Works and Property (http://docs.sandiego.gov/municode/MuniCodeChapter06/Ch06Art08Division01.pdf):

Article 8: Airports
(“Airports” added 9–16–1969 by O–10138 N.S.)

Division 1: Airports
(“Airports” added 8–4–1970 by O–10355 N.S.)
(Secs. 68.00 through 68.53 renumberedas Secs. 68.0100 through 68.0153 respectively 8–4–1970 by O–10355 N.S.)

§68.0100 Purpose and Intent

It is the purpose and intent of this article to provide rules and regulations governing the conduct of operations at all City– owned or controlled airports. (Renumbered from Sec. 68.00 on 8–4–1970 by O–10355 N.S.)

§68.0101 Definitions

(a) AIRCRAFT means any contrivance, now known or hereafter invented, used or designed for the navigation of or flight in the air.
(b) COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT means any aircraft used for the transportation for hire of passengers, cargo or mail where a City airport is the destination or point of origin of its flight, and any aircraft engaged in commercial utility work including photo, patrol, forestry, advertising, agricultural and flight training where a City airport is used for takeoff or landing.
(c) AIRPORT means the entire area of any airport owned or operated by The City of San Diego.
(d) CITY means The City of San Diego.
(e) DIRECTOR means the Director of the Airports Department of the City and his authorized assistants, deputies, employees and representatives.
(f) FIELD AREA means that area within the boundaries of an airport not open to the general public, including, but not limited to, passenger ramp gates, aircraft parking areas, aircraft operating areas, storage areas, certain sidewalks and buildings, and any other area so designated by the Director.

It's somewhat comical (if it weren't so sad) that they use "airport" in defining an "AIRPORT":
    "(c) AIRPORT means the entire area of any airport owned or operated by The City of San Diego."

[wingspan33]

From the below information, a paper airplane, Frisbee, and boomerang all meet the definition of an aircraft. Clearly, hang gliders and paragliders also fit. A hot air balloon, and even a modern ram-air parachute (which has some glide angle) would also fit the City of San Diego's definition of aircraft.

Oddly, if you could attach a passenger to your boomerang (perhaps a small mouse?), it becomes a Commercial Aircraft. Heck, tape a postcard to the underside of your Frisbee and you've got a Commercial Aircraft. Easiest of all (sorry I can't resist) is to fold your letter, which would of course include an address and stamp, into a paper airplane and launch it. You've got a Commercial Aircraft!

But remember that any of the above Commercial Aircraft I describe above would need to take off and/or land at a City of San Diego Airport!

As to an "Airport" being defined using the word "airport", . . . Weren't we all taught in grade school that you can't use a word in the process of defining that word?

I figure the relevance here to Bob K has to do with Robin Marien claiming that Torrey Pines City Park is an "Airport". Also, some recent claim that Robin Marien qualifies as a "Director". Which then allows Mr. Marien to kick people (starting with Bob K) out of the "Field Area" at Torrey Pines City Park/Airport. Well, that deserves a double "screwy" . Coming to such a conclusion relies on unfounded assumption upon unfounded assumption upon, . . .etc.

First off, does the City of San Diego include Torrey Pines City Park under the insurance policy/coverage which it maintains on its "real" airports? Also, I've noticed that the City of San Diego (on its City Owned airports web page) does not list Torrey Pines City Park. Odd? (Not!).

. . . Part of the confusion in this case is that the City of San Diego has its own definition of "Airports" and "Aircraft" which are not consistent with the FAA. I would think that the FAA's definitions would trump the City of San Diego in matters governing airspace, but it's not clear who's definitions would have precedence on the ground.

Here's a section of the San Diego Municipal Code from Chapter 6: Public Works and Property

. . . §68.0101 Definitions[/b]

(a) AIRCRAFT means any contrivance, now known or hereafter invented, used or designed for the navigation of or flight in the air.
(b) COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT means any aircraft used for the transportation for hire of passengers, cargo or mail where a City airport is the destination or point of origin of its flight, and any aircraft engaged in commercial utility work including photo, patrol, forestry, advertising, agricultural and flight training where a City airport is used for takeoff or landing.
(c) AIRPORT means the entire area of any airport owned or operated by The City of San Diego.
(d) CITY means The City of San Diego.
(e) DIRECTOR means the Director of the Airports Department of the City and his authorized assistants, deputies, employees and representatives.
(f) FIELD AREA means that area within the boundaries of an airport not open to the general public, including, but not limited to, passenger ramp gates, aircraft parking areas, aircraft operating areas, storage areas, certain sidewalks and buildings, and any other area so designated by the Director.

It's somewhat comical (if it weren't so sad) that they use "airport" in defining an "AIRPORT":
    "(c) AIRPORT means the entire area of any airport owned or operated by The City of San Diego."

[wingspan33]

Getting back to my original topic,

It is VERY interesting that the US Parachute Association (parachuting's equivalent to the USHPA) does not consider parachutes as aircraft. With the modern parachute being so similar to a paraglider, it's easy to conclude that neither qualify as aircraft.

However, both devices do navigate through the air with a human being (typically) attached - and maintaining some amount of control (piloting?). This sure makes them sound like aircraft!

The absence of an airframe is what leads me to thinking of them as NOT being aircraft. It's the "craft" part that seems to be missing from parachutes and paragliders.

As Merriam Webster defines Aircraft:

air·craft noun, often attributive \ˈer-ˌkraft\

: a machine (such as an airplane or a helicopter) that flies through the air

I've just never seen a "machine" made out of fabric. I've seen fabric "constructions" that have various useful purposes, but I don't see them as "machines".

( How's this as a test, . . . You can make a paraglider with a Sewing Machine, but can you make a Sewing Machine with a paraglider? )

Anyway, . . .

As to parachutes, paragliders and hang gliders actually being aircraft, . . .



There's one big stumbling block. If the FAA defined parachutes, paragliders and even hang gliders as "Aircraft" they have a legal obligation to "administer" the activities of said aircraft. Due to the nature of all the activities involving the use of parachutes, paragliders and hang gliders, FAA Administration (read "control") of those activities would be quite expensive! Truly beyond their traditionally allotted budget. So, their administrative "take" on parachutes, paragliders and hang gliders is that such devices are not aircraft and, as such, only deserve minimal regulation.

In thinking about it, it is in the favor of participants in each of the sports that utilize parachutes, paragliders and hang gliders to agree that what they "fly" are not "aircraft" as defined (and Seriously Regulated) by the FAA.

According to the FAA part 103, I fly an "Ultralight Vehicle".

According to the FAA part 105, Parachutists fly Parachutes.

But where does the FAA include Soarable Parachutes in Part 103 or 105?

The linked FAA Document ( http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... _103-6.pdf ), issued not long after Part 103 was created, mentions only "hang gliders" - including powered versions. It also mentions some "ultralight vehicles" that are simply light weight versions of more traditional aircraft. So far, I haven't found anything published by the FAA that fits with it having recognized the devices known as "paragliders".

Hmmmm.