Flying low and close to houses in a rural setting

[EE48]

I live along a river in a somewhat rural area. For the past 2-3 years we've had a pilot in the area flying very low near our house (and several other houses). My neighbors and I finally got fed up with it this weekend after he flew ~6 feet above the river and within ~60 feet of several houses along the river. I drove to the airfield, waited for him to land and talked with him. I don't think he's going to do it again, but if he does, I'd like to understand what my options are to report him and what sort of regulations he's violating. I'm not a pilot, but I can't imagine what he's doing is allowed by the FAA.

The photo below is a cropped frame from a video that I captured of him flying low along the river (below the roof line of my house and the houses of several neighbors). I also photographed him inside his plane at the airfield with the registration number of his plane visible. It's not in the photo, but about 500 feet in front of the plane there's a bridge spanning the river. He pulls up fairly last minute to avoid hitting it.

And a second follow-up question regarding rural landings... I looked up his registration number on the Internet and I found that last year he actually had an accident with his plane on the river. According to the NTSB report, it sounds like he was taxing, misapplied brake pressure, tipped forward and damaged both the prop and the rudder. On his Instagram it shows him landing his plane just about everywhere -- in friend's backyards, in fields neighboring stores and structures. What are the rules regarding rural landings like those? Is he allowed to try to land wherever he wants, whether it's a sandbar on a river or in a friend's backyard?

 

[Clip4]

First, thank you for taking the time to address this issue with the pilot in a neighborly manor.
The regulation concerning how low aircraft can fly is below. There are no FAA regulations that address where aircraft may land. Most states have laws addressing this, some don’t, but if he is landing on property with permission it is likely he is 100% legal.

If he doesn’t respect your neighborly conversation, your next step is to contact the FAA and make a complaint.

§ 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.

 

[Gary Ward]

Except when taking off and landing.^^^

I don't think he is a old bold pilot...

IMO he is too close to his/your home and the FAA would not like his actions.

 

[Lindberg]

If you believe what he's doing is unsafe or illegal, you can report it via the FAA Hotline:

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/aae/programs_services/faa_hotlines.

 

[Busflyer]

I too think you handled this well.

 

[Half Fast]

....and within ~60 feet of several houses along the river.

This would be a violation of the regulations. Do you have other frames from your video that depict this? In the frame you posted, it appears the pilot is over water and not close to people or structures, so there would be no violation. If there's a house or bridge or crowd just outside the frame, he's in violation, but there's no way to know that.

Hopefully your chat with him will settle matters and you won't need to do anything further.

 

[EE48]

If there's a house or bridge or crowd just outside the frame, he's in violation, but there's no way to know that.

I cropped down the frame for privacy reasons. The original video about ~16 seconds long and is a much wider shot with a date/time in the upper right corner. It includes a lot more of the foreground and other structures (including my house and my neighbors). It shows the pilot flying decently fast, low and level along a ~900 foot section of river (though he was probably flying low along the river for a mile or two prior to the video). It's also enough footage to make it clear he's not coming in for a landing (aside from the obvious fact that there's no suitable ground to land around there). He's about 80 feet from my house but he got as close as 50 feet to some of my neighbors who have their homes closer to the rivers edge.

We live a few miles away from a rural airfield. The occasional coming and going of aircraft does not bother us in the slightest. Personally, I find it fun to watch -- particularly when interesting firefighting aircraft using the airfield as a staging ground. But flying below my roof line within 80 feet of my house is a whole different thing...

 

[AKiss20]

This would be a violation of the regulations. Do you have other frames from your video that depict this? In the frame you posted, it appears the pilot is over water and not close to people or structures, so there would be no violation. If there's a house or bridge or crowd just outside the frame, he's in violation, but there's no way to know that.

Hopefully your chat with him will settle matters and you won't need to do anything further.

With the focal length and known length of the airplane in question, one could pretty easily calculate how close the camera is to the plane. If the pilot is within 500’ of a person, still a violation of the regs.

 

[Half Fast]

With the focal length and known length of the airplane in question, one could pretty easily calculate how close the camera is to the plane. If the pilot is within 500’ of a person, still a violation of the regs.

Agreed, if the focal length and electronic zoom factor is known. Not sure that it is.

 

[Lndwarrior]

And if you report him thru the above link the FAA will investigate them and likely very quickly. The FAA is slow as hell at most things but they can act surprisingly quickly when it comes to reported violations.

 

[Dana]

There has been some discussion about whether a plane that is "waterskiing" is a "landing and takeoff" (i.e. touch and go) for the purpose of the minimum altitude regulation. I don't know if he was doing that, but it might be a factor.

However to the OP, I would wait a bit and see if your friendly chat with him solves the problem. If not, then by all means report him.

 

[AKiss20]

Agreed, if the focal length and electronic zoom factor is known. Not sure that it is.

Not by us but presumably the OP would have such info in the exif data

 

[chemgeek]

14 CFR § 91.119 describes requirements for obstruction clearance, including flight in "congested areas." What constitutes a "congested area" is decided on a case-by-case basis, but the FAA has ruled in some circumstances that a cluster of homes, or people congregating on a beach or other location as a congested area. This aircraft would clearly be too low to be abiding by 91.119 (a) - in event of power failure, (b) - congested areas, or (c) - non-congested areas.