Flying low and close to houses in a rural setting

EE48 said:
As the details slowly come out...? The details remain the same. We have a pilot who flew his plane within 6 feet of the water vertically (below my roofline) and within 80 feet of my house (50 feet within my neighbors) horizontally. He was not landing and there is no suitable location to do so in that section of river. As others have pointed out, flying that low is in violation of FAA rules.

I openly stated earlier that I view this both as a nuisance and a safety issue. Would you call it safe and not annoying if someone flew an airplane down the middle of your street, equally close to your house, equally below the roof line of your home and without landing? I'd like to understand why you feel his behavior is illegal but acceptable.




Yeah, I'm aware that a plane of that size will not create a crater -- that part was just a joke. My point is that he's flying so low and so close that no one can see him on approach and have no idea what is rapidly/loudly approaching -- which causes alarm about what's about to happen. A bunch of non-aviators on the ground aren't going to think "Oh don't worry, that's the sound of a small two-seater single engine aircraft! It's not gonna create a crater if it crashes!"
Click to expand...
We get a lot of hysterical people making claims similar to yours and they normally are not real issues. A good example is when a neighborhood is built next to an airport that's been there for 60 years and then the new home owners start making complaints about the planes buzzing their houses.

This happens A LOT.

So, please forgive any skepticism shown. 80 feet is not very far, and frankly it sounds like an exaggeration. An average plane's wings are almost 1/2 that distance, so was the plane really so close you couldn't fit two planes between it and your house?

Most certainly if the plane was 80 feet from your houses physical structure, you have every right not to like it. Even then, it may still be legal, but it's certainly not polite, and the vast majority of us on this site would never consider doing such a thing even if it were legal.

Here's a picture of my driveway, which is about 80 feet long. Which means planes taxi on it 80 feet from my house every day. So I kinda have an idea what you're talking about. If someone flew full speed down my road, I'd be upset about it too.

But the plane in the picture has wings that are 36 feet wide. Was it really that close? You'd literally be able to hit it with a rock.

Screenshot 2024-07-17 at 1.57.39 PM.png
 
All that said, even if it was 400 feet, you certainly have a right not to appreciate it. And hopefully the pilot will respect that.
 
Salty said:
We get a lot of hysterical people making claims similar to yours and they normally are not real issues. A good example is when a neighborhood is built next to an airport that's been there for 60 years and then the new home owners start making complaints about the planes buzzing their houses.

This happens A LOT.

So, please forgive any skepticism shown. 80 feet is not very far, and frankly it sounds like an exaggeration. An average plane's wings are almost 1/2 that distance, so was the plane really so close you couldn't fit two planes between it and your house?

Most certainly if the plane was 80 feet from your houses physical structure, you have every right not to like it. Even then, it may still be legal, but it's certainly not polite, and the vast majority of us on this site would never consider doing such a thing even if it were legal.

Here's a picture of my driveway, which is about 80 feet long. Which means planes taxi on it 80 feet from my house every day. So I kinda have an idea what you're talking about. If someone flew full speed down my road, I'd be upset about it too.

But the plane in the picture has wings that are 36 feet wide. Was it really that close? You'd literally be able to hit it with a rock.

View attachment 131461
Click to expand...
If the wingspan is 36', then there'd only be 18' on either side of the river center. So 62' from the wingtip to the house. Twenty yards is way too close, but it's not touch distance.
 
EE48 said:
As the details slowly come out...? The details remain the same. We have a pilot who flew his plane within 6 feet of the water vertically (below my roofline) and within 80 feet of my house (50 feet within my neighbors) horizontally. He was not landing and there is no suitable location to do so in that section of river. As others have pointed out, flying that low is in violation of FAA rules.

I openly stated earlier that I view this both as a nuisance and a safety issue. Would you call it safe and not annoying if someone flew an airplane down the middle of your street, equally close to your house, equally below the roof line of your home and without landing? I'd like to understand why you feel his behavior is illegal but acceptable.




Yeah, I'm aware that a plane of that size will not create a crater -- that part was just a joke. My point is that he's flying so low and so close that no one can see him on approach and have no idea what is rapidly/loudly approaching -- which causes alarm about what's about to happen. A bunch of non-aviators on the ground aren't going to think "Oh don't worry, that's the sound of a small two-seater single engine aircraft! It's not gonna create a crater if it crashes!"
Click to expand...
But you know what an airplane sounds like, so "no idea what's rapidly/loudly approaching" seems a bit disingenuous. Same goes for hearing a muscle car or loud motorcycle screaming past your house (probably 80 feet away as well). I doubt you go tracking the car/motorcycle driver down because they were noisy and you had no idea what it was. Not meaning any offense at all, but this strikes me as more of an issue with someone disturbing your peaceful "back yard" every now and then and you want something done about it. It's not really about the safety of the residents or protection of wildlife/kayakers/etc. We are pilots here, so we generally would love to see an airplane flying down our street, noisy or otherwise. However, if one was flying down my street below my rooftop I'd have to assume he's crashing because there isn't 30' between the trees on either side of the road, lol. We do have a number of powered parachute guys who are frequently barely above tree top level in our neighborhood, but again, most of us think it's cool and go grab the kids to point it out.

The pilot may be in violation of FAA rules, and if they don't respond to your request to knock it off you can certainly file the complaint with the FAA.
 
dbahn said:
Not as clearly a you think. "In the event of power failure" only applies to the risk of people on the surface, not the risk to the airplane and its passengers.
Click to expand...
14 CFR 91.119(a) An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

In the event of an engine failure several feet above a narrow waterway with people and property on either side, I think that it would be difficult to argue that there is no undue hazard to persons or property during a high- or even low-speed pass. It might be difficult to adequately control an non-float aircraft in a water landing. I can't imagine the FAA not taking a very dim view of this, including throwing in the 91.13 reckless clause just for fun.
 
chemgeek said:
14 CFR 91.119(a) An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

In the event of an engine failure several feet above a narrow waterway with people and property on either side, I think that it would be difficult to argue that there is no undue hazard to persons or property during a high- or even low-speed pass. It might be difficult to adequately control an non-float aircraft in a water landing. I can't imagine the FAA not taking a very dim view of this, including throwing in the 91.13 reckless clause just for fun.
Click to expand...
The violation has already occurred by violating the 500 foot bubbe if the people and property are that close on either side. "Undue" hazard is one where it would be impossible to avoid it in an emergency landing, and ditching on the water is not hazardous unless there is no clear segment of waterway to ditch. Wheeled planes that are ditched don't bounce around out of control. They quickly dig in the gear and flip over within a very short distance. If that occurs too close to people or property 91.119 has likely already been violated.
 
Easy way to settle the 80 foot controversy.
Post the GPS coordinates about a half-mile from your house. We can track the course and width of the river without you giving away your precise location. Or, if you don't care just post your GPS coords or address.
 
Clip4 said:
The state EPA might disagree that 50 gallons of leaded fuel needlessly in a river isn’t a hazard to persons on the surface.
Click to expand...
Uuuh, I was referring to the postings about the FAR requirements to not endanger persons or property.
 
Lindberg said:
But that doesn't explain tipping over from brake misapplication.
Click to expand...

Have you checked out in tailwheel aircraft? Not really too hard to hit the brakes hard and lift the tail. Hard enough and the prop will hit the ground.
 
Domenick said:
Easy way to settle the 80 foot controversy.
Post the GPS coordinates about a half-mile from your house. We can track the course and width of the river without you giving away your precise location. Or, if you don't care just post your GPS coords or address.
Click to expand...
He'd have to be off by a factor of 6 for his measurement error to be material.
 
Pinecone said:
Have you checked out in tailwheel aircraft? Not really too hard to hit the brakes hard and lift the tail. Hard enough and the prop will hit the ground.
Click to expand...
I've never seen brakes on a floatplane. How do they work?
 
Lindberg said:
I've never seen brakes on a floatplane. How do they work?
Click to expand...
Pretty well, in my experience. You don't have to do anything to make them do that on landing, but it helps to kill the engine when you're pulling into a parking space.
 
It is easy to tell the distance between an airplane and a house.

If the dog jumps up and chases the plane, it may be too close...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top