Irresponsible, dumb and stupid you say. Normally I don't get excited over stuff posted on this forum, but when someone does something more than a standard rate turn- you label the pilot "irresponsible, dumb and stupid". Well, that bothers me. Granted, I wasn't there so I didn't see all of this take place, and I don't have all the facts (such as the other airplane, it's position and the altitude separation) but I can assume you are a pilot and you are labeling this other pilot like a uninformed news reporter, which irritates me. I fly aerobatics regularly, often several times a week and to read this, it disturbs me because someone could be saying this about me and that could jeopardize aerobatic flying for everyone even though all the legal requirements are met. In fact something like this taking place in the US right now. In that situation, a municipality cited a pilot for aerobatic flying within the city limits and the IAC is fighting hard to avoid this dangerous precedent from being set.
The facts as you stated: The pilot was in an aerobatic airplane, outside of B, C, D, & E airspace designated for an airport (based on your description of the location). You referred to this action as the "same as doing aerobatics in the downwind of ORD". Totally different circumstances based on locations. That would be Bravo airspace over a major city. The area you stated is outside of Naval Air Station Pensacola's Charlie airspace. This area is not within 4 miles of a victor airway. Congested area is debatable, the FAA doesn't have a firm ruling on congested, IE - a certain amount of population density determines congested, less than congested, sparsely and so on. So we can't elaborate on that detail.
As a pilot we are all critical of others actions, it's a personality trait we develop. Such as grading someone's landings. However, to call another pilot dumb, stupid and irresponsible is a bold move. Especially when they are 100% legal in their actions. Throwing those words around puts our flying freedoms in jeopardy.
