Calling out another pilot.

[Tram]

Again, the type of area is irrelevant.

(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.

So here's a question or perhaps a few..

Was your daughter the only witness to this event or was she riding with a group of people?
Which direction did the lawless aviator approach her from?
Do you know how reliable eyewitnesses are?
Is it possible to scare a horse from 500.01AGL?

so as I said, "sounds like he is closer than the 500 feet he's supposed to be from people"

now that raises a question for myself: does that mean if I am flying over a farm or something of the sort, I can get as close as I want (assuming safety), as long as there are no buildings, vehicles, people, or "vessels" around?

(are vessels supposed to be boats??)

Yes.. If you stay 500 away from structures, vehicles, people and vessels you are golden.. Some will argue that tree's are structures.. Some won't..

I don't have my FAR/AIM with me but what exactly is the definition of congested area..


I wonder because I sometimes fly over very suburb type places and I wonder what the population density (or whatever mesaure the FAR uses) has to be for me to go 500'

Neither the FAR nor the AIM define congested or sparsely populated areas.. That's up to pilot interpretation it appears..

Perhaps Blackhawk has some case law he can show us with a lil' precedent for a definition..

 

[Blackhawk]

So here's a question or perhaps a few..

Was your daughter the only witness to this event or was she riding with a group of people?
Which direction did the lawless aviator approach her from?
Do you know how reliable eyewitnesses are?
Is it possible to scare a horse from 500.01AGL?



Yes.. If you stay 500 away from structures, vehicles, people and vessels you are golden.. Some will argue that tree's are structures.. Some won't..



Neither the FAR nor the AIM define congested or sparsely populated areas.. That's up to pilot interpretation it appears..

Perhaps Blackhawk has some case law he can show us with a lil' precedent for a definition..

There is no definition of congested area or sparsely populated areas, but again it is irrelevant. If you look through case law if there are people or property involved, potential or real hazard to people or property, and credible witnesses then the FAA will normally take action against you. Numerous case law of pilots flying low over people in sparsely populated areas and having their certificates suspended or revoked. Several cases of people on horse back and the horses being spooked. Even at least one case of no people involved but damage to power lines. FAA was able to put 2+2 together (damage to power lines, damage to an airplane), and take enforcement action against the pilot. Normally the judges will say it's kind of like porn- we don't know the definition, but we know it when we see it.
And I would say that given my reputation with the FSDO, my background and my lack of involvement with the said pilot prior to this incident that I would be a reliable witness.

 

[Blackhawk]

Oh, and BTW, if you are the owner of the airplane you had better know who was flying it or the FAA will take legal action against you.

 

[Tram]

There is no definition of congested area or sparsely populated areas, but again it is irrelevant.

Fixated much?

Can you answer direct questions?

Was your daughter the only witness to this event or was she riding with a group of people?
Which direction did the lawless aviator approach her from?
Do you know how reliable eyewitnesses are?
Is it possible to scare a horse from 500.01AGL?


I think we're trying to have a discussion here.. It may or may not be directly related to your event.. Whether or not there is a definition - for future knowledge is relevant..

And I would say that given my reputation with the FSDO, my background and my lack of involvement with the said pilot prior to this incident that I would be a reliable witness.

I re-read your post and no where in the post do you mention that you were there.. All you state is that someone flew over your daughter at below tree top level, not that someone over yourself and your daughter.. So instead of playing your own bugle you could have said.. "I was there."

 

[Blackhawk]

Fixated much?

Can you answer direct questions?

Was your daughter the only witness to this event or was she riding with a group of people?
Which direction did the lawless aviator approach her from?
Do you know how reliable eyewitnesses are?
Is it possible to scare a horse from 500.01AGL?


I think we're trying to have a discussion here.. It may or may not be directly related to your event.. Whether or not there is a definition - for future knowledge is relevant..




I re-read your post and no where in the post do you mention that you were there.. All you state is that someone flew over your daughter at below tree top level, not that someone over yourself and your daughter.. So instead of playing your own bugle you could have said.. "I was there."

My daughter does not know enough about airplanes to get an N number or airplane type. So yes, I was there as well as a number of other horse back riders and a barn. There is no other way I could have tracked down the pilot to hear him spout a bunch of BS about how it was a sparcely populated area.
Who cares what direction the guy came from.
I told you how reiliable the witnesses are, I guess you just can't figure that part out.
The part about 500.1' is irrelavent. He was below tree top level.

 

[ColoradoPilot]

I was going to make that comment, but decided to leave it be since I didn't think anyone else noticed. lol

 

[derg]

And, in addition to eating babies, Doug Taylor lands with the mixtures closed all the way!

True story. I did have a concerned passenger Fedex a letter to my chief pilot about my crew failing to do a proper GUMP check on a 1900.

"...the props never went forward... the mixture stayed lean...."

 

[WacoFan]

True story. I did have a concerned passenger Fedex a letter to my chief pilot about my crew failing to do a proper GUMP check on a 1900.

"...the props never went forward... the mixture stayed lean...."

I think, on a 1900, it is ok to not move the props forward. Running the PT6 LOP though...frankly I would have written a letter as well. You're lucky I wasn't on that flight.

 

[Firebird2XC]

I think, on a 1900, it is ok to not move the props forward. Running the PT6 LOP though...frankly I would have written a letter as well. You're lucky I wasn't on that flight.

A captain I flew with on the 1900 apparently got an earful from a passenger one day... apparently the airplane never got about 3000 feet the whole flight.

You see, the passenger had a barometric altimeter on his wristwatch.

I remember hearing this story, looking down at the pressurization controller, and then just shaking my head.

 

[deadstick]

A captain I flew with on the 1900 apparently got an earful from a passenger one day... apparently the airplane never got about 3000 feet the whole flight.

You see, the passenger had a barometric altimeter on his wristwatch.

I remember hearing this story, looking down at the pressurization controller, and then just shaking my head.

Should have told him he'd get an accurate reading in the lav.

 

[derg]

A captain I flew with on the 1900 apparently got an earful from a passenger one day... apparently the airplane never got about 3000 feet the whole flight.

You see, the passenger had a barometric altimeter on his wristwatch.

I remember hearing this story, looking down at the pressurization controller, and then just shaking my head.

Another... "Tale... From the 1900!!!!!!"

(for those unfamiliar)

The 1900 has a headset jack in 1C used for line checks, FAA, whatever.

Anyway, a passenger brings his own headsets and, without the crew's consent, plugs in his David Clark and listens in on the interphone and hot mic for a roughly 45 minute flight.

He then screams at the crew for discussing non-essential safety of flight issues in cruise and writes a sternly-written letter about the crew's unprofessionalism to the chief pilot.

I wasn't the crew involved but I did read the letter (had a short stint on the safety committee) and I loved the part about the crew's 'confusion' about how to deviate around a line of thunderstorms because the captain kept tweaking the tilt on the radar.

...how they weren't paying attention because the TCAS shouted "traffic! traffic!" and the crew failed to, in his estimation, drop everything else and locate that traffic.

 

[dasleben]

Another... "Tale... From the 1900!!!!!!"

(for those unfamiliar)

The 1900 has a headset jack in 1C used for line checks, FAA, whatever.

Anyway, a passenger brings his own headsets and, without the crew's consent, plugs in his David Clark and listens in on the interphone and hot mic for a roughly 45 minute flight.

He then screams at the crew for discussing non-essential safety of flight issues in cruise and writes a sternly-written letter about the crew's unprofessionalism to the chief pilot.

I wasn't the crew involved but I did read the letter (had a short stint on the safety committee) and I loved the part about the crew's 'confusion' about how to deviate around a line of thunderstorms because the captain kept tweaking the tilt on the radar.

...how they weren't paying attention because the TCAS shouted "traffic! traffic!" and the crew failed to, in his estimation, drop everything else and locate that traffic.

I very occasionally will get a passenger in the right seat (or the seat behind that one) who'll bring his/her own headset and plug in without asking. I honestly don't care too much if they want to listen (I'm single-pilot so what are they going to listen to?), but I've had a couple of them ask me to turn the intercom on so they can ask a bunch of questions. Of course, they'll often break sterile in the process.

Looking forward to that cockpit door again.

 

[dasleben]

Actually, another funny story:

Without a cockpit door, passengers often feel that you're more "available" to them in terms of asking questions. That's fine, but of course, many of them don't realize the difference between "good time to chat" and "bad time to chat."

Last week flying with an FO (I do that on a somewhat regular basis), we had one passenger on the back; a lady in her 40s from somewhere deep in the heart of Georgia. At about 100' after takeoff with the gear still in transit I hear:

Hey! HEY!!! HEY GUYS!!!! HEY CAN AH TAKE A PITCHER?!?!

Of course, my low-time FO excuses himself from our little flying airplanes endeavor by turning all the way around, partly taking off his headset, and answering by yelling his response to the passenger in the back (and into his boom mic). Meanwhile, we're climbing through, oh, about 200 feet.

I had a couple words with Mr. FO when we were up a little higher!

 

[Tram]

Nevermind.....

 

[Tram]

True story. I did have a concerned passenger Fedex a letter to my chief pilot about my crew failing to do a proper GUMP check on a 1900.

"...the props never went forward... the mixture stayed lean...."

I believe it.. In the Jetstream, we took a highly qualified CFI from STL to UIN one day.. After the flight he made his way to the cockpit and told us that this was the most dangerous flight he had ever been on and he was going to write our company a letter about it.. He was all in a tizzy because we didn't do a proper run up and never even checked the mags on either engine..

Actually, another funny story:

Without a cockpit door, passengers often feel that you're more "available" to them in terms of asking questions. That's fine, but of course, many of them don't realize the difference between "good time to chat" and "bad time to chat."

Last week flying with an FO (I do that on a somewhat regular basis), we had one passenger on the back; a lady in her 40s from somewhere deep in the heart of Georgia. At about 100' after takeoff with the gear still in transit I hear:

Hey! HEY!!! HEY GUYS!!!! HEY CAN AH TAKE A PITCHER?!?!

LOL.. Another Jetstream story, were on short final (starting the flare) into the Owensboro, KY and had a guy ease his way up to the cockpit and snap a few pics with the flash on...

It was awesome..

 

[inigo88]

Neither the FAR nor the AIM define congested or sparsely populated areas.. That's up to pilot interpretation it appears..

Perhaps Blackhawk has some case law he can show us with a lil' precedent for a definition..

For the love of god man, stop arguing with the man and READ IT AGAIN!

Sec. 91.119

Minimum safe altitudes: General.

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

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

(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.

(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.

[ (d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface--
(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
(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.]

Look at your sectional. The FAA Aeronautical chart user's guide clarifies the following three definitions:

Large Cities - Outlined in yellow, in the shape of the city.
Cities and Large Towns - Yellow square.
Towns and Villages - Black circle.

All three of those are considered congested areas. Period. There is no room for interpretation, it's spelled out above.

The only part left up to interpretation is settlement, which is presumably where somebody is living. I have also heard the argument that major interstates are congested areas, even though they are not technically an "open air assembly of persons." (Unless they're all driving convertibles? :cwm27

Edit: Smartass comments redacted.

 

[Tram]

I am of the milkman.
I am is the milkman.

 

[SmoothLanderJ]

Another... "Tale... From the 1900!!!!!!"

(for those unfamiliar)

The 1900 has a headset jack in 1C used for line checks, FAA, whatever.

Anyway, a passenger brings his own headsets and, without the crew's consent, plugs in his David Clark and listens in on the interphone and hot mic for a roughly 45 minute flight.

He then screams at the crew for discussing non-essential safety of flight issues in cruise and writes a sternly-written letter about the crew's unprofessionalism to the chief pilot.

I wasn't the crew involved but I did read the letter (had a short stint on the safety committee) and I loved the part about the crew's 'confusion' about how to deviate around a line of thunderstorms because the captain kept tweaking the tilt on the radar.

...how they weren't paying attention because the TCAS shouted "traffic! traffic!" and the crew failed to, in his estimation, drop everything else and locate that traffic.

I was debating on whether to post this....but now I feel better! Last week while on final approach (my leg) to SLC, another aircraft aborted the takeoff and we had to go around. We were proabably 2 miles out and had plenty of time to execute the go...everthing was fine it was VFR, no big deal.

TWO days ago myself and the Captain get a call from the MSP FSDO. A disgruntled passenger on that flight reported that we were being reckless on the go around, saying that were only 200ft off the ground before we went around, violently pulled up and banked the aircraft. None of which is true. I really dont know what they guy was mad at, we were still 5 minutes early! Maybe it was because he was on a CRJ-900 for 3hrs..:dunno:..I dont know

The FAA guy was pretty understanding. Hearing it from the pilots perspective made way more sense him. He told me he was just following protocal whenever someone reports something to them. Everything is good in the end.

 

[inigo88]

Oh I get what you meant now. Furthermore, I just realized I called out another pilot (who is presumably much my senior) in a thread about not calling out other pilots. My bad.

I feel like the language of the reg is using "of" like one would use "i.e." or "for example" (while probably purposefully leaving the definition legally open-ended... sneaky FAA), but in the spirit of the thread... agree to disagree. :beer:

 

[Tram]

Oh I get what you meant now. Furthermore, I just realized I called out another pilot (who is presumably much my senior) in a thread about not calling out other pilots. My bad.

I feel like the language of the reg is using "of" like one would use "i.e." or "for example" (while probably purposefully leaving the definition legally open-ended... sneaky FAA), but in the spirit of the thread... agree to disagree. :beer:

Who knows what they mean. I am sure they leave it vague on purpose..