PWRED PARAGLIDER ULTRALIGHT VEHICLE PLT INADVERTENTLY ENTERED OXR CLASS D AIRSPACE AND OPERATED LOWER THAN 500 FT OVER A STATE BEACH.

Narrative

THIS INCIDENT INVOLVED A FLT UTILIZING A FOOT LAUNCHED/LANDED PWRED PARAGLIDER (PARAMOTOR). 6 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE OCCURRENCE OF THIS INCIDENT; I HAD RECEIVED FLT INSTRUCTION FROM A WELL-KNOWN PARAMOTOR INSTRUCTOR PLT THAT OPERATES A BUSINESS OF SELLING PARAMOTOR EQUIP AND PROVIDING PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTION NEARBY; AND AT THE LOCATION INVOLVED IN THIS INCIDENT. I AM NOT A RESIDENT OF THE AREA NEAR WHICH THE INCIDENT OCCURRED AND HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THE MAJORITY OF MY PARAMOTOR FLYING; FOLLOWING MY TRAINING WITH THE ABOVE MENTIONED PARAMOTOR INSTRUCTOR; ELSEWHERE. WITHIN 2 HRS PRIOR TO THE TKOF FOR THIS FLT I TELEPHONED MY PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR TO ASCERTAIN IF THERE WERE ANY SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OR RESTRS THAT I SHOULD BE AWARE OF WHEN FLYING IN THAT LCL AREA. ALTHOUGH THE PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR DID MENTION THAT I SHOULD NOT TAKE OFF OR LAND ON THE MCGRATH STATE BEACH; HE MADE NO MENTION OF ANY SPECIAL ALT RESTRS INVOLVED WITH FLT OVER THE BEACH. THE PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR MENTIONED SOME GEOGRAPHICAL REFS TO ME THAT COULD BE USED TO KEEP CLR OF THE CTLED AIRSPACE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OXNARD ARPT (OXR). THE FLT WAS CONDUCTED WITH A TKOF FROM THE VENTURA COUNTY BEACH; 4+ MI NW OF OXR; FOLLOWED BY A LNDG AT THE SAME LOCATION. I DID NOT TAKE OFF OR LAND ON THE STATE BEACH. THE FLT WAS CONDUCTED ENTIRELY IN AIRSPACE DESCRIBED BY THE PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR AS BEING APPROPRIATE. FURTHERMORE; I ADHERED TO THE NORMAL CONSTRAINTS OF AVOIDING CONGESTED AREAS; MAINTAINING 500 FT ALT OVER UNCONGESTED AREAS AND AVOIDING FLT CLOSER THAN 500 FT OF ANY PERSON; VESSEL; STRUCTURE; ETC; OVER SPARSELY POPULATED AREAS (REMOTE AREAS OF THE BEACH). I DID NOT WILLINGLY VIOLATE ANY RULE OR REG OR CREATE A HAZARD TO ANYONE ON THE GND. I DISCOVERED THE FACT THAT THERE MIGHT BE A PROB WITH THE FLT WHEN I RETURNED TO MY VEHICLE THAT WAS PARKED NEAR THE VENTURA COUNTY BEACH. AT THAT TIME A CALIFORNIA STATE PARK RANGER INFORMED ME THAT IT WAS AGAINST REGS TO FLY LOWER THAN 500 FT AGL OVER A STATE BEACH REGARDLESS OF HOW SPARSELY POPULATED IT WAS. I WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY AWARE OF THIS REG BUT NEVERTHELESS; I DID NOT; TO MY KNOWLEDGE FLY AT LESS THAN 500 FT; OVER THE IRREGULAR GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF THE STATE BEACH. FURTHERMORE; UPON REEXAMINATION OF THE SECTIONAL AERONAUTICAL CHART FOLLOWING THE FLT; I DISCOVERED; THAT DESPITE ADHERING TO THE GEOGRAPHICAL CONSTRAINTS FOR THE FLT THAT I RECEIVED FROM MY PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMAINING CLR OF CTLED AIRSPACE; THAT I MAY HAVE INFRINGED ON THE EDGES OF THE AIRSPACE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OXNARD ARPT (OXR). FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO MY POSSIBLY VIOLATING AN AIRSPACE REG WERE: FACTOR #1) I RELIED UPON THE ADVICE FROM A LCL PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR TO PROVIDE ME WITH ACCURATE INFO CONCERNING PARAMOTOR FLT OPS WITHIN THE LCL AREA. THE INFO PROVIDED ME WAS NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE OR ALL-INCLUSIVE. TRUSTING A 'LCL' INSTRUCTOR PLT TO PROVIDE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE INFO WAS A HUMAN FACTOR THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SIT. ANOTHER HUMAN FACTOR THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SIT WAS THAT I PERCEIVED THE INFO FROM THE 'LCL' INSTRUCTOR PLT TO BE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE AND NEGLECTED TO VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE INFO. FACTOR #2) THE REG THE PARK RANGER CITED (CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGS TITLE 14 SECTION 4304) IS NOT PUBLISHED IN A LOCATION THAT MOST PLTS; OR INSTRUCTORS (INCLUDING CFI'S); WOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH OR CHK PRIOR TO MAKING A FLT. FACTOR #3) THE SECTIONAL AERONAUTICAL CHARTS FOR CALIFORNIA DO NOT DEPICT THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OVER WHICH THE REG THE PARK RANGER CITED APPLIES NOR DO THEY DISPLAY THE CONTENT OF REG. I; NOW BEING AWARE OF THE STATE REG; WILL CONDUCT MY FLTS TO INSURE THAT I AM IN COMPLIANCE WITH IT. I WILL CONTINUE TO ATTEMPT TO ATTAIN BRIEFINGS CONCERNING LCL OPS FROM LCL PLTS BUT WILL BE MORE SKEPTICAL OF THE INFO ATTAINED THROUGH SUCH BRIEFINGS. I WILL ATTEMPT TO CONFIRM THE VALIDITY OF THE INFO ATTAINED FROM SUCH 'LCL PLT' BRIEFINGS PRIOR TO UTILIZING IT. I BELIEVE THAT THE CONTENT OF CCR TITLE 14 SECTION 4304 SHOULD BE PUBLISHED ON THE SECTIONAL AERONAUTICAL CHARTS FOR CALIFORNIA. FURTHERMORE; I BELIEVE THAT THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OVER WHICH THE REG APPLIES SHOULD BE DEPICTED ON THE SECTIONAL AERONAUTICAL CHARTS. I HAVE ALREADY VERBALLY INFORMED OTHER PLTS AND CFI'S; WHO WERE UNAWARE OF THE REG; OF ITS EXISTENCE AND I INTEND TO POST A MESSAGE ON AN ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD READ BY PLTS THAT WILL BRING THE EXISTENCE OF THE REG TO THEIR ATTN. FURTHERMORE; I WILL SHARE MY EXPERIENCE WITH MY PARAMOTOR FLT INSTRUCTOR SO THAT HE WILL BE ABLE TO SHARE THE EXISTENCE OF THE REG WITH OTHER PLTS AND PARAMOTOR INSTRUCTORS. I WILL ALSO SUGGEST THAT HE REVIEW THE SUITABILITY OF THE LANDMARKS THAT HE USES; AND SHARES WITH HIS STUDENTS; TO DEFINE THE LIMITS OF THE CTLED AIRSPACE SURROUNDING THE OXNARD ARPT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE WAS INFORMED THAT THE STATE PARK CITATION NOTICE HAD BEEN RETURNED AS INVALID BY THE STATE DISTRICT ATTORNEY SINCE THE STATE IS NOT AUTH TO MANDATE AIRSPACE WITHOUT COORDINATING AN APPROVAL WITH THE FAA. HOWEVER THERE ARE STATE PARKS WITH WILDLIFE RESTR AREAS WITH 2000 FT MINIMUM ALT WHICH HAVE BEEN COORDINATED WITH FAA WHICH THE STATE ENFORCES. THE RPTR IS AN AIRLINE PLT WITH APPROX 11000 HRS TOTAL TIME AND 25 HRS IN THE PWRED PARAGLIDER. HOWEVER; HE DID NOT KNOW THAT A PWRED PARAGLIDER WAS CONSIDERED A VEHICLE RATHER THAN AN ACFT. THEREFORE; THE RULES OF PART 91 DO NOT APPLY AND THAT THE APPLICABLE RULES IN PART 103; COVERING ULTRALIGHTS; DO NOT CONTAIN AN MSA RESTR OF 500 FT FROM PERSONS AND PROPERTY AS IN PART 91.