If it’s illegal, why does (e.g.) Dortmund allow me to regularly fly low approaches with guests on board? I have requested (and always been granted) a low approach over the active on a number of occasions, in fact never been denied it, because some of my guests ask to see what it’s like, to land at an international airport – they themselves have stood at the terminal, waiting to board a SqueezyJet flight to somewhere or other and saw a small light aircraft come in, so wanted to experience it for themselves. Even Düsseldorf offered me a low approach once, when all I wanted was a transit from November to Sierra…..
When flying a low approach, I have absolutely no intention of landing so semantically speaking, it can’t be considered an approach to land but as it’s happening over an airport, I presume this makes it acceptable….
-) yes, if and when performing a low-pass it must be contributing to landing or take-off, to be legal. An aborted landing, or even a runway inspection before landing, will do very well.
-) I too understand the trouble to be about showing off – but contrary to some, I think the difference is quite obvious: anyone inspecting the runway, or aborting an intended landing, will be flying slow and will, given the choice, have lowered the landing gear; OTOH a pilot wanting to show off will fly as fast as possible, if only for the sharp pull-up at the end of the runway, and will retract gear and produce smoke if these options are available. I should think the speed can be found from modern techniques like ADS-B rather easily. A low-pass at 95 or 101% of Vne can never contribute to landing or take-off.
-) above all, I fully agree with
there have to be something left of the UK aerolegal exceptionalism
Steve6443 wrote:
If it’s illegal, why does (e.g.) Dortmund allow me to regularly fly low approaches with guests on board?
Because it’s not the task of ATC to decide upon the legality of your flying, I expect. Not that I argue that it actually is illegal.
Legality aside, why are intentional low approaches (or low passes, rather, as I now learned the correct terminology) be default to “show off”? The first one I did was with an instructor and since then, I’ve been offered multiple times by the initiative of Düsseldorf Tower and if I was in the mood for it – with PAX or without out I’d do it: For the heck of it, not to show-off. In fact, I believe at an airport like DUS, nobody is actually going to notice. ;-) Most people will think it’s a small airplane taking off or landing. Jan, I will avoid producing smoke at all costs during these maneuvers and others.
I’ve never (yet) considered replying “D-Exxx, negative – unable due legal restrictions”.
Peter wrote:
I think that, ahem, to experience ground effect, you need to be, ahem, somewhat lower than 500ftMore like 5ft.
You would have to be doing that over a runway and with the gear down.
Unless I mis-understand
I agree, 5 ft does warrant a modicum of attention, even over water. And a different technique: wings level, steer with rudder. However, one can feel ground effect at about one wing span – say 30 ft AGL, and for a heavy/underpowered aircraft it’s sometimes a welcome alternative/adjunct to horsepower – or climbing at Vx.
It’s entirely legal in the UK under a CAA derogation from SERA. See ORS1124 para 3.
https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4No1124.pdf
[ above replaced by varous docs, most recently (2021) by ORS4 1479 ]
I am not sure, but – can somebody please check if it is legal to put pilots who scrutinise legislation to figure out if something everyday is actually illegal out of their misery?
Steve6443 wrote:
If it’s illegal, why does (e.g.) Dortmund allow me to regularly fly low approaches with guests on board?
There was a time when Stuttgart EDDS would refuse low passes below 500ft (2013-2014), citing the airlaw that prohibits flying below 500ft other than for the purpose of landing and departing. For some reason this limitation was lifted again and I was allowed unlimited low passes the last two times.
It appears to be an unsolved mystery of the airlaw.
achimha wrote:
and I was allowed unlimited low passes the last two times.
Not long ago, while waiting at the holding point, I saw a D-M registered aircraft (= microlight) perform a low pass over the full length of the runway not higher than 10ft above the runway. At the end, he pulled up 45 degrees and into a 60 degree bank at the same time. I was mentally rehearsing my first-aid knowledge as we would probably have reached him quicker than the airport fire brigade, but luckily he managed to get back to level flight just in time. ATC didn’t care the least as they are not some kind of “air police”.
Cobalt wrote:
Cobalt 02-Sep-15 18:31 #17
I am not sure, but – can somebody please check if it is legal to put pilots who scrutinise legislation to figure out if something everyday is actually illegal out of their miser
Im with you.
Every time I get onto this site to read something, figuring I might learn something new, my only take away is: Way TOO MANY rules which tends to cause contradictions and ambiguities resulting when one rule contradicts the other. The end result is an unworkable system and therefore the “screw it” attitude develops.
I think the way this happens is, when the knuckle heads (powers that be) get together to make a rule and then when that rule is found out to contradict another rule instead of modifying their rule and admit it was a mistake they just move on and ignore it. Leaving the guys who fly <50 hrs a year to debate the issue.
