I was wondering if the FAA has a specific distance a plane is NOT allowed to fly under when in motion over neighborhoods? I know my property is in the flight path of a small airport. I’ve seen planes fly over when inclement weather is coming, and they are always very low. Today we had a thunderstorm blow through and a small piper cub skipped across the tree tops about 200 yards from my house. I can tell you what color shirt the pilot was wearing. He must have been 10 feet above the tops of the trees…if that.
IANAPilot, but I know that the general rules you are looking for would be found in the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) for the USA and the CARs for Canada. Most countries have similar sets of standards.
Part 91.119 states:
If the pilot was operating under IFR:
Depending on the category of aircraft, there are likely other parts and subparts that apply (general aviation vs commercial aviation, etc). In the case of your Piper coming in low, it might have been the safest way to get down to avoid the storm… overall, the FARs have the main purpose of ensuring safe flight, and so any action deemed necessary to ensure the safety of the flight without putting others at risk is generally acceptable in the case of an emergency or otherwise urgent landing, IIRC.
Touching on what mnemosyne said. There’s a general “get out of jail free” clause in most aviation authorities regulations which permit the pilot to break the rules if doing so is necessary to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft. The idea of it is that you must plan the flight such that you will operate within the rules, however if during the flight something unexpected happens and you’re left in a position where continuing to follow the rules would be dangerous, you may take whatever actions are required to ensure your safety. In your case it may be that the pilot was trying to maintain visual flight conditions beneath cloud (flying in cloud can kill pilots pretty quickly if they’re not equipped or trained to do it.) Or it may just be that he was toodling around in a cub casually breaking the rules and was hoping no one would notice, that happens from time to time too.
Pipeline patrol has a FAA wavier so they can fly low legally Out in west Texas I would pull up to clear the fences… :D. Aerial applicators (crop dusters) also.
In an emergency, you do what you have to do. If you die, they can’t do much more to you. If you live, you sometimes have some ‘splainin’ to do.
Yes, I was going to mention the “explaining” part. After landing in someone’s backyard (alright, it was a farmer, he had a HUGE backyard) due to an unexpected weather change I did have to have a “conversation” with the Authorities, which wasn’t a pleasant 40 minutes, but they agreed I had taken a wise course (and thanked me for not burdening them with dead pilot paperwork).
Being close to an airport is somewhat problematic, as airplanes must of necessity pass through low altitudes while landing, and once in awhile approach lower than usual for one reason or another. “Just above treetops” may be acceptable, although actually hitting the trees is not.
Based on a 49" tire height that looks like a 16-20 foot clearance over the beach. :eek:
Sounds like the pilot got caught in bad weather. The general rule for T-storms is to assume there is hail inside the cell. Just flying near a freshet on a hot day can be an experience in convective turbulence so staying away from anything producing lightning is a pretty good idea.
So where does that put somebody flying into San Diego? Downtown’s scary close to the runway… I don’t think you can land there without being less than 2000 feet away from obstacles taller than your altitude.
There’s a parking garage just off the east end of the runway at San Diego that looks mighty perilous when driving by on I-5.
According to Wikipedia, the hills east of the airport have always presented some obstacle, requiring a steeper-than-normal descent (376, rather than 317, feet per mile). The parking garage, built later, was apparently made as tall as was permitted. Says the article, “Aircraft clear the parking structure by the required 109 feet.”
The rules only apply when you are not landing or taking off. For large aircraft, their takeoff weight is regulated so they can takeoff, having suffered an engine failure, and still climb clear of obstacles, however the required clearance from obstacles in this phase of flight is quite low (50 feet in the Australian rules.)
Also, 2000’ is only a third of a nautical mile, not very far.
Dear Phlosphr,
As a pilot for 25 years I can certainly answer your question.
The incident you describe sounds suspicious from a legal standpoint. The minimum en-route altitude for all aircraft is either 500 or 1000 feet above ground level. Which of these applies depends on the spacing of the houses below as an indication of the population density below; low population density, lower altitude.
There are exceptions. The most common is approach to landing. If the aircraft you saw was approaching an airport or intending to land in a field, he/she is in no way restricted as to altitude. The other exception that could apply here is that the pilot in command may make his own rules in any kind of emergency, though an explanation may be required later.
Today, it may be hard to read the tail number on an airplane. Though international rules require 12” “N” numbers on each side of the plane, this country requires only 4” numbers. Since these numbers are painted on, one must think long and hard about wheather he/she will ever want to fly to Canada or Mexico as that would not be possible with smaller than 12” numbers. So, if you can read the numbers, you can complain.
Hope this helps!
Zocanta
