Case by Case Determination of "Congested Area" - AOPA Article

Folks, this is some "good to know" information about how the FAA handles low flying..

http://pilot-protection-services.ao...ted-Area?WT.mc_id=160122epilot&WT.mc_sect=sap

sj

This is what you read at 5:45 am on your day off? 8)

It's gets boring on the treadmill... and its not my day off. Full day of web programming today and maybe all weekend.

sj

Ha, they haven't been to the airports I have where the airplanes are parked 10 feet from the runway. I think the moral to that article is don't do anything near anyone because the FAA can get you.

SJ said:

It's gets boring on the treadmill... and its not my day off. Full day of web programming today and maybe all weekend.

sj

Click to expand...

It will be much appreciated I am sure.

I read the article earlier today, it was part of the weekly ePilot newsletter I get every Friday. I too thought about posting a link to it.
I've had some discussions with other pilots about what constitutes a "congested area" per FAR 91.119 "minimum safe altitudes". The article reflects what I've always said, the verbiage is kept purposely vague so that they can interpret it however they want to.
Note that the article specifically refers to low passes, as in the "hey watch this" maneuvers that you see at a lot of grass-roots fly-ins.

I have heard that two folks in a rowboat was ruled a congested area. And we had a guy violated for doing a low pass at an airshow. Ther rule, apparently, has a caveat for landing and takeoff that does not work for low passes.

The FAA is your friend!

Its called Catch 22.

That's just the half of it. For you off airport types, note also the wording of "landing or takeoff exemption", specifically it says "except when necessary for landing or takeoff". I know of two seaplane cases and one wheel plane case where the pilots were cited for overflying people on the surface on landing. In these cases, the FAA determined that it was not necessary for the pilot to land in that particular direction. One of these was a seaplane landing near a dock......where he parked.

Be careful out there, folks.

MTV

Since I retired from the military I have been dreaming of moving into our cabin or another cabin as far into the Alaskan bush as possible.... Just about every day I hear more and more reasons in favor of that....

mvivion said:

That's just the half of it. For you off airport types, note also the wording of "landing or takeoff exemption", specifically it says "except when necessary for landing or takeoff". I know of two seaplane cases and one wheel plane case where the pilots were cited for overflying people on the surface on landing. In these cases, the FAA determined that it was not necessary for the pilot to land in that particular direction. One of these was a seaplane landing near a dock......where he parked.

Be careful out there, folks.

MTV

Click to expand...

Spot on Mike

Attempting to take Kent Hrbek for a ski plane ride but taking his camera man instead at a busy fishing contest was defined congested area and landing or T.O. Had little bearing in my defense.

...and paragraph 1. "In the event of a powera t failure....." There is far more to this than congested or un congested areas. You could be at 10000' and in violation.

I'm curious about that last sentence. "In addition, the FAA will subpoena your GPS data and use it."

I wonder if they have ever subpoenaed data from Spot, inReach, Spidertracks, or cell phones. If I'm not mistaken, ForeFlight now has an option to record your GPS track log and automatically upload it to their servers at the end of the flight.

These modern conveniences are the bee's knees, and I intend to continue using them, I just wish I had more control over the data sharing.

mvivion said:

That's just the half of it. For you off airport types, note also the wording of "landing or takeoff exemption", specifically it says "except when necessary for landing or takeoff". I know of two seaplane cases and one wheel plane case where the pilots were cited for overflying people on the surface on landing. In these cases, the FAA determined that it was not necessary for the pilot to land in that particular direction. One of these was a seaplane landing near a dock......where he parked.

Be careful out there, folks.

MTV

Click to expand...

Can you provide dates, places, or any additional information pertaining to these examples. I could look up the specifics of these cases. I suspect there may be "additional information" that could help explain "why".

This iceberg is deeper than you think!

bubb2 said:

Can you provide dates, places, or any additional information pertaining to these examples. I could look up the specifics of these cases. I suspect there may be "additional information" that could help explain "why".

Click to expand...

I don't have the specifics. One was at a lake near Wasilla several years back. One was at Lake Union in Washington. A different incident involved two FAA Inspectors on an Alaska lake on the Peninsula, though that wasn't a "congested area" question. I don't have dates.

There is no "additional information" that could help explain "why". They were cited specifically because they flew closer than 1000 feet to a "congested area". They did so while landing, which they thought was their legitimate excuse for flying close to people on the surface. But, READ the regulation: "Except when NECESSARY for landing or takeoff". Can't get much clearer than that. In these cases, the FAA argued (accurately, by the way) that the pilots COULD have landed in a different part of the lake or in a different direction, thereby eliminating the "need" to fly close to persons or property on the surface. These cases were very straightforward, and the pilots found no sympathy with Administrative Court or the Board. Their response was "Read the regulation".

If you fly over or close to a "congested area", and bear in mind that the FAA has determined that a small group of Boy Scouts standing on a lake shore constituted a "congested area", EVEN while landing or taking off, there had better not be any other way to do so without flying close to a congested area.

This is most likely in the "off airport" world. Consider the example of an airport. There can be a hundred people standing next to the approach end of a runway, but you can still land there, because there is really no other alternative, assuming you're going to land at that airport. But, take your seaplane to a lake.....a party is going on at the dock you want to park on. So, you fly over or near that dock, swing around and land right next to the dock. **** hot, and it's captured by a dozen cell phones. If the wrong person gets hold of that video, you're about to have a bad month.

MTV