joepilot

Supporter
  • Content Count

    96
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About joepilot

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    SoCal

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Good info in the links, thanks! All of which illustrate (with facts & data) that an intentional low pass (buzz) is illegal, and also may push safety limits. The Lancair article dissects why each section of the minimum altitudes in the regs is violated, especially at a crowded airport, surrounded by homes & buildings such as mine. A conscientious pilot should ask themself, would I be doing this with the FAA onboard?
  2. How does this relate to the post you quoted? Also, they are referring to published speeds on a SID or STAR, or deleting a prior issued speed restriction. NOT authorizing relief on FAR regulations.
  3. EXACTLY my biggest concern! Thanks.
  4. I don’t believe the intent of this language is to allow high speed, level flight, low over the entire runway. It clearly references expediting multiple practice instrument approaches, as an example. Not trying to show off to your buddies at the far end of the field (and creating a bunch of extra noise). I wouldn’t want to be fighting with the FAA over my certificates based on a very loose interpretation on this paragraph.
  5. Tom, I agree. Well stated.
  6. Exactly, kortopates. For you guys who are answering my question of “where’s the language that says you can?” with a question “where’s the language that says you can’t?”, it’s there in the first sentence: “Except for take off or landing”. I’m only asking if anyone knows of an FAA interpretation or language (not hangar talk) that exempts (a), (b), or (c) above.
  7. No, we’re not calling the Feds over this. Geesh! But if I can get our airport manager to publish something, it may cut down on them. But my original question was if someone had any contrary facts from the regs that made these (intentional fly by’s, not go around’s) legal.
  8. All I’m saying is it’s almost becoming an epidemic at my airport. Some guys do it in formation. They do it it a loud T-6. There’s already noise issues with neighbors, like most SoCal airports, and not that I’m a noise sympathizer, but these PITA complainers have power & have shut down more than one airport in the past. It just creates extra noise & traffic for no reason.
  9. Anyway, so far I’m hearing lots of excuses of why you guys THINK you can do a fly by (and violate the 500’/1000’ limitation) but no facts or regs that allow it. Legally. My airport’s RW is not isolated. It’s closely surrounded by hangars, structures, planes, houses...
  10. No. Not the 250 below 10 rule. The 200 KIAS (or clean maneuvering) flying in airspace underlying the Class B.
  11. And sometimes at work ATC asks us to maintain something faster than 200 KIAS while under Class B. Doesn’t mean it’s legal, just means they don’t know the regs.
  12. ⬆️ Exactly. Most try to impress themselves with a pull up and/or steep turn at the end. Flying down the RW at 20’, but easily WITHIN 500’ (let alone 1000’) of hangars, buildings, other planes, etc) doesn’t seem to qualify for the “other than congested areas” language. Not to mention the houses at either end of the RW.
  13. The regs exemption from the min 500’/1000’ altitudes is ONLY for the purpose of take off & landing. And when these guys are announcing in the pattern they’re doing a low pass, they don’t have any intention of landing. Also, a normal go around procedure usually doesn’t require you fly down the entire length of the RW at 20’.
  14. Don’t mean to be an old fuddy-duddy, but I guess it’s too late. There has been a growing number of low pass, often “high speed” fly by’s at my non towered airport. Which is surrounded by dense housing developments (SoCal). A contagious case of monkey see, monkey do. Can anybody show me in the regs where this is legal, other than an FAA approved airshow?? -Joe