Low Approach

[cwuflyboy]

This is another one of those grey areas, and that if the FAA wanted to they have a couple of ways they can try and nail you on.
one is

§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

Another is
§ 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.

The key being here for takeoff and landing, if they can prove that you never intened to land, they may have a case.

 

[flywithastick]

§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.

Granted - this one's always a wild card...

§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.

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

Personally, I never put myself somewhere I can't get out of when making a low pass. If I do it, it's with enough energy to either climb & circle or make the 90-270 for landing.

They might win the argument by fiat, but as far as I'm concerned, I don't violate 91.119 (a)

TedCFII -

Isn't that considered an overhead approach in military parlance?

Hey - now you're catching on! "cleared for the overhead... maintain 5 ft until break...!!!"

Regular overhead is an approved approach for anyone. AIM 5-4-24. done it at Ellington (cl D, maintaining 900' until break) with a flights of 2,3 & 4 planes. Lots of fun!

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[AirSeattle]

Scaring the critters off the runway is a fine idea that DOES work, HOWEVER, don't forget the racket also wakes up the birds and now you have a flock of a flight hazard to negotiate!! (I took one thru the windshield of a Jet Ranger at 50'/100k and into my face on one of those "low approaches"!...new underwear please!


joel