Generally I like to be as high as possible over the sea, having only one engine.
If it quits then I want minutes to prepare for the ditching, not seconds.
kwlf wrote:
One would imagine that the lower you fly, the less likely you are to lose the horizon but the more likely you might be to collide with the water.
I think horizon does not exist bellow 300ft in VMC/IMC/land/sea or gets too much distorted to get you anything 
however, flying very low give more nearby sea surface features (e.g. waves, shadows…) and gives better visual clues than flying at 5000ft looking 100nm ahead in a hazy day, I would be happy to do 5h of low hand flying over water in bad weather (2km vis & 500ft ceiling) than of 5min of hand flying in IMC bellow MSA near terrain, the only problem with flying low near the sea is not the horizon or loss of control, it is what happens when the donkey quits…
I think, over water, height is crucial for the reasons given: more time to sort any issue.
Re low flying over water, I think this needs special skills, although doing it at say 500ft should be safe if you have the right QNH (check altimeter against GPS altitude for a gross error check) and can fly reasonably accurately. A lot of pilots can’t hold altitude to better than 500ft and that’s different
Peter wrote:
Re low flying over water, I think this needs special skills, although doing it at say 500ft should be safe if you have the right QNH (check altimeter against GPS altitude for a gross error check) and can fly reasonably accurately. A lot of pilots can’t hold altitude to better than 500ft and that’s different
I’ve done low flying over water at 200 ft. The flying itself doesn’t need any particular skills — the navigation does. Of course you wouldn’t want to do this in poor visibility.
If there is a good texture on the water, sure.
Ibra wrote:
the only problem with flying low near the sea is not the horizon or loss of control, it is what happens when the donkey quits…
I would say it makes little difference far out at sea. It’s worse over snow. You get so called whiteout or flat-light making it impossible to see any features of the terrain.
Over the years there have been quite a few planes lost between mainland France and Corsica put down to the merging of sea and sky over the Med.In the 1990’s the DGAC and FFA ran an educational campaign for crossing this area. It did not advise flying low.
I avoid both low flying (less than 1000 ft )wherever possible. There are too many wind turbines popping up all over the place. The tips of the blades often reaching 400 feet.
I also detest that feeling of doom one gets when seeing a low cloud over a distant hill, when my planned route woul take me over that hill.
Slightly off topic does anyone else get the sense that on some days, the ground seems closer than on other days? I am really talking about in the circuit. You set the QNH or QFE on the altimeter (it is correct you have done it based on circuit alt/height, not by ATIS or AFIS) the weather is roughly the same as the day before, as are the temperatures, you fly the circuit, visibility is great as it was the day before, you fly the same circuit maintaining same altitudes yet today the ground seems closer than it did yesterday. So much so that you recheck your altimeter. I know its some sort of optical illusion but despite half a century in photography and film I can find no logical reason for it.
LeSving wrote:
I would say it makes little difference far out at sea. It’s worse over snow. You get so called whiteout or flat-light making it impossible to see any features of the terrain.
No idea of low flying over the snow but few feet above flat while cloud blanket seems a non-event but I think orientation versus the sun and shadows in a cloudless sky makes a hell of a difference but you have the same issue as night flying, you will need to use airspeed, gyro and altimeter to fill some of the gaps
LeSving wrote:
Flying at minimum ceiling (500 ft) is no problem. Flying at minimum vis (1.5 km) is close to impossible
I couldnt agree more. I absolutely have no problem flying VFR under a low cloud base or near clouds when the visibility is good. But I get really nervous when flying with low visibility. 1500m is really not very far ahead at 100mph, its even less at a 120kt. On the two or three occasions I have been really uncomfortable when flying and have actively looked to get on the ground asap, it wasnt due to just cloud base, it was the low visibility and the undefined cloud base because of the low visibility, and I doubt the visibility was as low as 1500m, in fact Im pretty sure it was twice that at least.
Regards, SD..
It is ok to fly in 1500m vis but since it is like pea soup, you have to fly very low (below 1000ft) and know the area well, because you could get trapped by topography which is well short of a box canyon.
On my local rwy 20 IAP, one gets only just visual at the 800ft DH, in 1500m vis. At night (runway lights) it would be better.
