RCU Forums - View Single Post - An Incident with Lessons for All of Us
View Single Post
Old 10-21-2010 | 12:33 PM
  #163  
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
Sport_Pilot
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Acworth, GA
Default RE: An Incident with Lessons for All of Us


ORIGINAL: Silvaire

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

The first low pass was illegal and the air boss should have told the pilot to leave the area when he did this.
Please site a source for this being "illegal" - from the AIM or an FAR, preferably.



<h2><span style="font-size: larger">"</span>Sec. 91.119 &mdash; Minimum safe altitudes: General.</h2>Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

</p>

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.</p>

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.</p>

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.</p>

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface&mdash;</p>

(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and</p>

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.</p>

[Docket No. 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91&ndash;311, 75 FR 5223, Feb. 1, 2010]<span style="font-size: large">"

</span>
<span style="font-size: x-small"><span><span>A low clearing pass is only legal if there are no people near the runway, so if you are doing this to determine this then it should be done 500 feet above the runway or higher. Also it becomes illegal if you continue to fly far enough from the runway so thay you cannot safely make a landing per paragraph (a). There is no such clearing pass proceedure in AIM other than flying over the airport above the pattern altitude to check for aircraft in the pattern, and flying at pattern altitude over the runway to check for suitability of the landing site to include people. You can easily see people standing or working on the airfield from pattern altitude. If you can't then your doctor should not have given you your medical.


</span></span></span>
Also, the "air boss" had no authority to direct the FS pilot, nor did he have a reasonable expectation that he would be able to contact him. (No NOTAM for the R/C demo flights, and an uncontrolled field with no radio requirement.)
A competent airboss would have made it clear that the pilot violated the FAR and that another such violation would be reported to the FAA. That is no guarentee, but it would work in most cases. However I do agree that he should not have allowed the RC to fly back over the runway till the plane landed.
</p>