A wholly theoretical question

[Daddy O]

This is a wierd question for the controllers.

The Queen Mary is docked at Long Beach. If someone levitated the ship 500' AGL and left it there for a few days, would they be breaking any FAA laws? Could they be proscecuted in any way for violating any kind of air space regulations? Especially if it were unmanned, just hanging there by its anchor not going anywhere.

Yes, it is a bizarre question for my next novel.

[Ryan B]

You're trying to understand controlled airspace for helicopters right?

I can't quite tell by looking at the sectional but if the queen Mary were inside LGB's class Delta (the blue dashed ring about 5 mi radius) it would need to talk to LGB tower for permission in the D surface area . (Technically as long as tower said "queen Mary" the ship could be in the delta.

If ye ole ship is not in the D looks like the next airspace is the bottom of the LA class B at 8000.

P.s. I'm answering your question as if it were manned lol... It it was a balloon in the D at 500 AGL they'd have to get permission and there would be a notam issued.

[kullery]

I think that would depend on if the chain was "tethering" it or if the chain was "supporting" it. In one case it would be considered an aircraft while in the other case it might be considered a structure.

[Peter Grey]

You would be violating FAR 101.13

The Queen Mary would count as a moored balloon per 101.1

(1) Except as provided for in §101.7, any balloon that is moored to the surface of the earth or an object thereon and that has a diameter of more than 6 feet or a gas capacity of more than 115 cubic feet.

And here is 101.13

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate a moored balloon or kite—

(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;

(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;

(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles; or

(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.

(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the operation of a balloon or kite below the top of any structure and within 250 feet of it, if that shielded operation does not obscure any lighting on the structure.

[Peter Grey]

That last post assumes that the anchor is on the ground. If it isn't then your violating several parts of FAR 23 with regards to airworthiness of an aircraft.

[Daddy O]

So the Queen Mary is moored about 6 km from KLGB so it would be within the 5 mile range of that FAR. Is it a serious rule violation? Like incarceration? The character in my book is trying to violate as few laws as humanly possible while changing the entire world paradigm.

So other than that FAR, it would not be busting any kind of TFR or post-911 crazy homeless security air laws eh?


Another question: if you had a flying car but wanted to fly it legitamately, how hard is it to register the thing as an experimental vehicle WITHOUT anyone from the government looking at it, other than on paper maybe. How hard would it be for a mad scientist to register his flying car as an experimental vehicle without letting the feds know it was a flying car?

[Peter Grey]

The FAA doesn't have the power to send anyone to jail, just fining at worst. Other agencies may have issue with floating the Queen Mary but that's beyond my skill set.

So other than that FAR, it would not be busting any kind of TFR or post-911 crazy homeless security air laws eh?

No, no TFR over Queen Mary. There really aren't that many new laws post 911 in the aviation world, just various NOTAMs banning procedures and part 99. None apply in this case.

Another question: if you had a flying car but wanted to fly it legitamately, how hard is it to register the thing as an experimental vehicle WITHOUT anyone from the government looking at it, other than on paper maybe. How hard would it be for a mad scientist to register his flying car as an experimental vehicle without letting the feds know it was a flying car?

Impossible, you can't get an airworthiness certificate of any kind (including experimental) without the FAA looking at it.

If the flying car classifies as an ultralight then the FAA doesn't have to look at it, but if you could make a flying car fit the ultra light category you can collect your millions at your leisure.

[Daddy O]

Peter, that is a really great idea. He could register as an ultralight...since it is powered by antigravity, it would essentially be whatever weight you set it for. It could play really funny if the hero registered a flying cadillac as an ultralight.

[Keith Smith]

I would think an ultralight would have to remain an ultralight even when its power source quits. If the Queen Mary's power source gave up the ghost, it would weigh approximately the weight of the Queen Mary. I suspect that would cause issues during the registration process. "Switched on, this craft weighs 500lbs....although on occasion it has been known to balloon every so slightly to 82,000 tons."

[Peter Grey]

Peter, that is a really great idea. He could register as an ultralight...since it is powered by antigravity, it would essentially be whatever weight you set it for. It could play really funny if the hero registered a flying cadillac as an ultralight.

Not quite how I meant that comment to be taken. There are a whole set of rules beyond weight for an ultralight which I guarantee a Cadillac won't comply with.