Wave Letters - Generally

[shaun_...@hotmail.com]

SO.....I am reading this wave letter.

Two of the signatories are a well known glider club and a well known paraglider/ultralight club.

The FAA agreement makes no mention of 4096 transponders, ADS-B out or much else other than a frequency for ATC and the means to open the wave windows.

But the glider club specifically mandates a 4096 altitude encoding transponder. The ultralight/paraglider club makes no such requirements.

I'm merely curious about the nature of wave letters generally and how other clubs may have implemented them. Why stop at a transponder and altitude encoder? Include ADS-B out, FLARM, and terrain avoidance. Hell, let's require instrument ratings too. I suppose all those folks doing wave there, they're getting their 24 month checks signed off in those logbooks before turning them on, right?

[2G]

The concept of a wave window is a volume of the sky that ATC keeps IFR traffic out of - they don't provide separation for aircraft inside the wave window, hence no need for transponders. This is a terrific example of FAA working with the aviation community, so don't muck it up with unnecessary requirements.

Tom

[Charles Longley]

Yeah what Tom says!

[shaun_...@hotmail.com]

I'm honestly confused why a soaring club would give back all the shit the FAA gave them for nothing. Fuck it. I'll find someplace else to do wave.

[01sky...@gmail.com]

Even more generally, does one really need a prearranged wave window agreement, especially if one is not associated with any club, which is becoming more common these days? This question is to those who have soared in Class A airspace without such an agreement/letter: My glider has a Trig TT22 transponder. Approaching FL180, couldn't I just radio the appropriate Center sector and nicely ask permission to fly VFR, say in the block FL180 – FL210, and offer to squawk whatever code they want? If I had dressed more warmly and had an oxygen face mask instead of a cannula, I would have been tempted to make such a call on a couple of flights already.

[R]

What club or better what airport of operation are we referring too?
R

[Eric Greenwell]

On 7/14/2021 10:57 PM, 01sky...@gmail.com wrote:
> Even more generally, does one really need a prearranged wave window agreement, especially if one is not associated with any club, which is becoming more common these days? This question is to those who have soared in Class A airspace without such an agreement/letter: My glider has a Trig TT22 transponder. Approaching FL180, couldn't I just radio the appropriate Center sector and nicely ask permission to fly VFR, say in the block FL180 – FL210, and offer to squawk whatever code they want? If I had dressed more warmly and had an oxygen face mask instead of a cannula, I would have been tempted to make such a call on a couple of flights already.
>

It's been years since I've been directly involved in wave windows and Letters of
Agreement, but I think an instrument rating and an IFR rated aircraft or an LOA is
required to operate in Class A airspace. Just getting ATC permission to enter does not
remove this requirement.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

[Brian]

> >
> It's been years since I've been directly involved in wave windows and Letters of
> Agreement, but I think an instrument rating and an IFR rated aircraft or an LOA is
> required to operate in Class A airspace. Just getting ATC permission to enter does not
> remove this requirement.
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Please someone correct me if I am wrong. For flights in Class A airspace I agree an instrument rating is required, But I don't believe there are any required instruments for IFR flight in a glider. However ADS-B is required in Class Airspace. So If you are instrument rated and current, and have ADS-B out I don't see any issue with requesting a clearance to fly in Class A airspace.

Brian

[Richard Pfiffner]

The problem is all letters of agreements with ARTCC were canceled about a year ago by the local FISDOs The FISDOS previously for last 50 years or so were not involved just ARTCC. You now have to get a certificate of waiver for 14 Code CFR 91.135 from the local FISDO. It appears there is a p contest going between the Local fisdos and ARTCC. We are the government and are here to help.


Richard

[shaun_...@hotmail.com]

I asked one of the people who negotiated the wave letter in question for his thoughts. He said that while no material changes had taken place the FSDO wanted to exercise a level of control since they did, after all, have enforcement authority while the ARTCC did not. As to Richard's point, I still think it's accurate, the FAA is turning back the clock on deregulation.

If the point of the wave letter isn't to accomodate predominantly VFR soaring or paragliding, then what exactly is it? Simply removing ADS-B out and instrument proficiency requirements doesn't strike me as a major coup. How many paragliders launch with a transponder? I'll guess exactly zero. Why add encumbrances?

Not trying to get into a fight with the local club. They'll die of natural causes before my next trip unless something substantial changes.

[Charles Longley]

Coincidentally I am planning on opening one of the wave windows near Seattle this weekend. I’ll let everyone know how it goes.

[Richard Pfiffner]

I am trying to get the Waiver from the Sacrament FISDO for the PASCO Wave Window around Mt Shasta.

The Application requires that we list the following for all pilots using the wave window.
Aircraft Make and Model
N Number
Pilots Name
Certificate No. & Rating
Home Address.

At this time the Sacrament Fisdo is requiring the aircraft be instrument capable, pilot have an instrument rating, ADSB- required.

(b) Communications. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft operating in Class A airspace must be equipped with a two-way radio capable of communicating with ATC on a frequency assigned by ATC. Each pilot must maintain two-way radio communications with ATC while operating in Class A airspace.

(c) Equipment requirements. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft within Class A airspace unless that aircraft is equipped with the applicable equipment specified in § 91.215, and after January 1, 2020, § 91.225. ADSB-Out.

So at this time it is clear as MUD.

Richard,

[Eric Greenwell]

It's not clear what an LOA does for the pilot, if he and his aircraft are already legal to
fly in Class A airspace, and requested block airspace. Maybe it allows several gliders to
use the same block airspace together? I can imagine them wanting people to have
transponders, perhaps set on 1202, so they can be assured everyone is within the LOA
airspace.

[shaun_...@hotmail.com]

Less work to just restrict it to people who are instrument rated, flying aircraft that are instrument certified and be done with it. It's more than a little ironic that the soaring community is paving the way for it. Far less work getting a motorglider up to snuff for this.

[waremark]

The requirement for an instrument rating (if there is such a requirement) - are you talking about a full power pilot's instrument rating? If so, how may glider pilots have such a thing, and is it relevant?

In the UK, instrument flight used not to be restricted in any way, recently a Cloud Flying Rating was introduced for Sailplane Pilots' Licences - with requirements relevant to glider pilots. However, it is not illegal to fly gliders in IMC whether or not you have such a rating. When wave windows are opened, there are no special requirements for pilots of glider equipment. Without a wave window, I think it is unlikely that a clearance would be given for glider flight in Class A but if it was I think a full power licence Instrument Rating would be required. This is supposition on my part, outside my expertise.

[Charles Longley]

On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 4:43:10 PM UTC-7, waremark wrote:
> The requirement for an instrument rating (if there is such a requirement) - are you talking about a full power pilot's instrument rating? If so, how may glider pilots have such a thing, and is it relevant?
>
> In the UK, instrument flight used not to be restricted in any way, recently a Cloud Flying Rating was introduced for Sailplane Pilots' Licences - with requirements relevant to glider pilots. However, it is not illegal to fly gliders in IMC whether or not you have such a rating. When wave windows are opened, there are no special requirements for pilots of glider equipment. Without a wave window, I think it is unlikely that a clearance would be given for glider flight in Class A but if it was I think a full power licence Instrument Rating would be required. This is supposition on my part, outside my expertise.

Well I opened a wave window with Seattle center today. Area 2 from 180 to 200 for 3 hours. It was very easy to do. I gave it back to them after 2 hours because the forecast wave didn’t happen. Probably a minor inconvenience to a couple of airliners. Looking back at it I should’ve called Seattle Center as soon as I had a little altitude and given them an estimate for getting in the window.

Charlie L

[Richard Pfiffner]

From what FISDO did you get the certificate of Waver?

Richard

[Charles Longley]

No idea what you’re talking about Richard. We have a letter of agreement with the SEA ARTCC.

Charlie

[Richard Pfiffner]

Charlie,

I suspect you do Not. Letter from FAA last year.

Memorandum
Date: 6/11/2020
To: Distribution
From: Jeffrey Szczygielski, Acting Director, Operational Policy & Implementation, AJT-2
Subject: Manned Balloon and Glider Clubs Operating in Class “A” Airspace
The Air Traffic Organization (ATO) has been made aware of potential Letters of Agreement (LOA)
with Manned Balloon and Glider clubs that are operating in class “A” airspace. However, FAA
Order JO 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration, guidance requires proper coordination
with the Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) for such operations.
All LOAs, memorandums, and local authorizations that waive the provisions of 14 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 91.135, Operations in Class “A” Airspace, (FL180 and above) must
be coordinated with their local FSDO. FAA Order JO 7210.3, Chapter 19,
Section 19-1-2 (c) states “Applications for waiver or authorization that require both Air Traffic
Certificate Organization (ATO) and Flight Standards (AFS) technical considerations must be
handled jointly.” It further states, “(d) The grant of a of Waiver or Authorization constitutes
relief from the specific regulations stated, to the degree and for the period of time specified in the
certificate, and does not waive any state law or local ordinance.” ATO and AFS must assess the
hazards with waiving the Instrument Flight Rule requirement for Class A operations and develop
provisions to mitigate the risk, if the proponent wants to fly in class “A” airspace under
VFR conditions.
Until further notice, do not issue any LOA, memorandum, or local authorization that waives the
provisions of 14 CFR 91.135 without coordination with the jurisdictional FSDO. AFS is
responsible for ensuring the qualification of civil pilots, airworthiness of civil aircraft
participating in these operations, and the safety of persons and property on the ground affected
by these operations.
If your facility has an LOA, memorandum, or local authorization referencing Manned Balloons
and/or Gliders that waive the provisions of 14 CFR 91.135 to operate in class “A” airspace, the
following steps must be taken:
1. The facility must review the document and have the proponent complete Form 7711-2
and submit to the local FSDO for approval. If the form has been completed within the
2
last two years, it does not need to be re-submitted. However, if it is older than 2 years, a
new document must be completed. The facility can also complete Form 7711-2 for the
club or organization and submit it to the FSDO.
2. FSDO will coordinate with the appropriate Air Traffic facility to advise them of an
approval or disapproval, along with possible mitigations.
3. A list of LOAs, Memorandums, and local authorizations that waive
14 CFR 91.135 must be sent to the Operations Support Group (OSG) to record the
number of documents in the system.
ACTION: All facilities must submit a roll-up to confirm completion of the above documents by
September 15.
The Technical Advisory Group, AJT-22 is diligently working to change the language in FAA
Order JO 7210.3. This will allow for guidance on coordinating such operations, and confirm
which option is best (LOA, a waiver, Certificate of Authenticity (COA), or a combination of all
documents).
If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Ron Singletary, Group
Manager, Technical Advisory Group, AJT-22, at Ron.Sin...@faa.gov.
Distribution:
Franklin McIntosh, Acting Director, Air Traffic Operations, Central Service Area, AJT-C
Calvin Rohan III, Acting Director, Air Traffic Operations, Eastern Service Area, AJT-E
Jeff Stewart, Acting Director, Air Traffic Operations, Western Service Area, AJT-W

Richard.

[Charles Longley]

Looks like an internal FAA letter. Means nothing to me.

Charlie

[kinsell]

Agreements with ARTCC were revoked and must be renegotiated with your
FISDO.

[shaun_...@hotmail.com]

Having spoken with only two people who actually were participants in the process of re-writing the existing letters -

Both said that the overarching concern was the previous letters left the FSDOs out of the loop. Since the FSDOs actually have responsibility for any enforcement action and really are the proper venue to waive specific equipment or qualifications, I can see the logic behind that. It's not a 'bad' or 'good' thing, it's just the correct way to have done it in the first place.

That said, I'm curious what the Cascade Soaring letter looks like. Also, have they added any mandatory equipment requirements not found in the LOA? It looks like a pretty sane and reasonable approach to managing wave boxes.