Hot Air Balloon and Powered Paraglider Collide in AZ

OtisAir

OtisAir

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
642
Location
Lansdale
Display Name
Display name:
OtisAir
Wasn't Me!

---------- snip -----------

PHOENIX — A motorized paraglider ran into a hot air balloon Saturday morning in central Arizona, sending two of the four people onboard to the hospital.
It happened during an airport open house in Cottonwood, which is about 100 miles north of Phoenix.
Ian Gregor with the FAA says the two aircraft were at an altitude of 1,000 to 2,000 feet. The balloon landed in a parking lot about 1/2 mile east of the airport.
Two of the three people onboard the balloon were taken to a hospital. Cottonwood police Sgt. Gareth (GARTH) Braxton says the injuries did not appear to be life-threatening.
Another balloon passenger and the pilot of the paraglider appeared to be uninjured.
Braxton says the two aircraft became entangled, the balloon ripped open and both fell to earth quickly.

------- End Snip -----------
 
OffCenter said:
How in the HELL do the two SLOWEST things in the sky run into one another?????:confused::confused::confused:
Click to expand...

Failure to yield.

I'm not up on my "right of ways" for this class of aircraft, but I bet the balloon (less maneuverable) has right of way over the powered parachute, yes?
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Failure to yield.

I'm not up on my "right of ways" for this class of aircraft, but I bet the balloon (less maneuverable) has right of way over the powered parachute, yes?
Click to expand...

Ya think?

On the other hand, those balloons are so small, they're easy to miss. Plus, it probably violates the "no relative motion" theory of collision avoidance.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Failure to yield.

I'm not up on my "right of ways" for this class of aircraft, but I bet the balloon (less maneuverable) has right of way over the powered parachute, yes?
Click to expand...

The powered paraglider was most likely an ultralight (Part 103), while the manned balloon would be covered by Part 91. FAR 103.13 is applicable. Ultralights must yield to all other aircraft. Powered ultralights must yield to un-powered ultralights.

Baring extenuating circumstances, the paragilder will likely be found at fault.

(Important trivia: there is no equivalent to Part 91's section 91.3 in part 103. So there is no "pilot in command is directly responsible for and final authority" clause applicable to ultralight pilots, but neither is there a "pilot in command may deviate from any rule in this part in an emergency" clause.

Also, whereas a sport pilot can't fly above 10,000 ft MSL (or 2000 ft AGL, whichever is higher) ultralight flyers are not bound by such altitude restrictions. Nor are there any oxygen requirements for such lofty flights (those are in part 91.))
 
Jim Logajan said:
The powered paraglider was most likely an ultralight (Part 103), while the manned balloon would be covered by Part 91. FAR 103.13 is applicable. Ultralights must yield to all other aircraft. Powered ultralights must yield to un-powered ultralights.

Baring extenuating circumstances, the paragilder will likely be found at fault.

(Important trivia: there is no equivalent to Part 91's section 91.3 in part 103. So there is no "pilot in command is directly responsible for and final authority" clause applicable to ultralight pilots, but neither is there a "pilot in command may deviate from any rule in this part in an emergency" clause.

Also, whereas a sport pilot can't fly above 10,000 ft MSL (or 2000 ft AGL, whichever is higher) ultralight flyeers are not bound by such altitude restrictions. Nor are there any oxygen requirements for such lofty flights (those are in part 91.))
Click to expand...
Can you hang a transponder on an ultralight?
 
SkyHog said:
Can you hang a transponder on an ultralight?
Click to expand...

I posted similar thoughts on another board ... the solution is for the balloon pilot to "hang" four knuckles at the base of the ultralight pilot's nose! Stupid, just stupid! :mad:
 
I don't think it's off-base to assume the PG pilot was trying to see how close he could get to the balloon without hitting it... and found out. :rolleyes2:
Balloons, BTW, have the right-of-way over everything... which is logical, considering that they can really only maneuver up or down. To change heading, they need to ascend or descend to where the wind might be blowing from a different direction.
 
Last edited:
Mtns2Skies said:
Except any aircraft under duress or in an emergency
Click to expand...
Technically true, but almost moot... they're just not very good at getting out of the way. If I was flying any other type of craft, say, making an approach with some sort of emergency,and a balloon was directly in my way, I'd expect to have to go around it, even if the balloon pilot knew the rules and was trying to yield to me.
 
BTW, Powered Paragliders are not ultralites. Powered Parachutes are. Powered Paragliders aren't even considered aircraft by the FAA. They do abide by Part 103 but are not placed in the ultralite category.
 
OtisAir said:
BTW, Powered Paragliders are not ultralites. Powered Parachutes are. Powered Paragliders aren't even considered aircraft by the FAA. They do abide by Part 103 but are not placed in the ultralite category.
Click to expand...

If you have a source that indicates that the FAA does not consider powered paragliders aircraft (or even ultralights) I'd be interested in seeing it. I'm looking at the FAA definition for "aircraft" and it seems like it should be broad enough to cover paragliders. Perhaps you meant to type "airplane" instead of "aircraft"?
 
"Shocked witnesses described the sickening sound of the impact as something akin to a marshmallow hitting a pillow"
 
Jim Logajan said:
If you have a source that indicates that the FAA does not consider powered paragliders aircraft (or even ultralights) I'd be interested in seeing it. I'm looking at the FAA definition for "aircraft" and it seems like it should be broad enough to cover paragliders. Perhaps you meant to type "airplane" instead of "aircraft"?
Click to expand...

Hi Jim, You're Correct. I did mean to write airplane. I suppose catapulting a Winnebego into the air could constitute an aircraft. :D

Thanks for the attention to detail. :)
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top