Was this legal?

Fearless Tower said:
I don't think I would have posted that on YouTube.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Enough there to sustain an enforcement action for multiple violations.

At a minimum he was not meeting any VFR cloud clearance requirements after he canx IFR.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The FAA would probably also have a cow over mounting that camera on a balanced control surface.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Can you get a contact approach clearance from the tower AFTER canceling IFR?
Click to expand...
It's theoretically possible, but would take coordination between Tower and TRACON and no other IFR traffic in the area. Not something that would happen quickly. But you still have to remain clear of clouds, and he didn't do that.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
He may have also been relying on datalink WX for METAR reports.
Click to expand...
Like last week when I was relying on the 009OVC on my XM going into Salisbury, asked for the 14 approach circle to land 5 (14 convenient, 5 into the wind), and was seriously surprised that I didn't even have ground contact at 900. Told tower I needed straight in on 14, they said fine, and I broke out at 450 AGL. Unwise...XM weather can be rather old, and if I'd listened to the AWOS, I'd have heard it as 500 overcast.
 
Inverted said:
Without watching more than a split second, do we know he wasn't in class G airspace?
Click to expand...
Yes. He had to be in E-space or better when he cancelled, and he was clearly less than 1000 above the deck at that time. And even if that was one of those few towers with G-space, he went through a cloud on downwind -- and even in G-space, you have to remain clear of clouds when VFR.
 
steingar said:
I hope FAA guys don't troll Youtube looking for pilots to bust.
Click to expand...
There was a kid over on the red board who posted some stupid inflight videos on YouTube. An FAA guy got wind of it and downloaded them before he could take them down, and used them to bust him.
 
Ron Levy said:
There was a kid over on the red board who posted some stupid inflight videos on YouTube. An FAA guy got wind of it and downloaded them before he could take them down, and used them to bust him.
Click to expand...

T***Air, legendary. Wonder what they slapped him with. The whole "extra curricular" IFR and the mention of Mr Air reminded me of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruJ3_ZaVJms
 
Last edited:
Listening at 1:07, there appears to be two pilots on board, one a CFI. He's coaching the other guy through keeping the nose off in the landing. So that video wasn't just bad one bad pilot's judgement, it was also bad training.
 
jesse said:
I was with a student one night, we were in VMC and had been for some time, we were cleared for the visual approach and he accepted it. I could tell by looking at things that it did appear there was a chance this wasn't going to work out. A bit later the student realized his mistake and we told the controller we couldn't maintain clear of clouds and that we're climbing and requesting the RNAV. The controller cancelled our visual and vectored us to the RNAV. Things really closed up at that point and we ended up breaking out on the RNAV at around 600 ft.

Lesson was that just because the controller cleared you for a visual doesn't mean a visual is actually going to be possible even though we're in VMC when it was accepted. The airport had no automated weather and if you looked real close one could see that there were indeed clouds moving in quickly. Night can be deceiving. The nearest weather was only about 15 miles away and was reporting broken at around 4000 or so..which is what the controller went off.
Click to expand...

I remember that.
 
dell30rb said:
I was going to say something about class G too but it was a towered airport. In that case SVFR would have been appropriate and got him his 1mi and clear of clouds...

Regardless it is rare that it is safe or prudent.
Click to expand...
SVFR only works if you don't actaully enter the clouds.

He was on an IFR clearance...I don't understand why he didn't just take the extra 5-10 minutes to fly one more approach and do it safely and legally.:rolleyes2:
 
Gubbins said:
Yes, he probably didn't want to do the approach. Some pilots are lazy or in a hurry.

Last year I experienced this first hand. I and another plane a few miles behind me were coming to KEDC which had an overcast layer somewhere around 1000ft AGL or so. We were both with Austin Approach. I asked for the GPS 13 approach, and he cancelled IFR and reported the field in sight. Because of that he was able to take a shortcut and head directly for the field and so got in before me. I had just got my IR, so didn't think to say anything at the time (I was concentrating on the approach). In retrospect I should have told approach that there is no way he could have been able to cancel IFR. There were no gaps that he could have snuck through. Not that I want to play policeman or be a tattletale, but there are REASONS why we have these rules and pilots like that could one day run into one of us because they are too important/skilled to feel the need to follow the rules.
Click to expand...
I know of a guy who always goes VFR at 16.5 or 17.5, no matter what. Atleast his airplane (a turbine single) has TCAS :rolleyes2:
 
Cruiser said:
I doubt the camera mount was legal so why should the flight be?

He probably didn't want to take the time for an approach so he cancelled otherwise he would have been vectored out beyond the FAF. At least he should have stayed IFR and flew the visual approach. There was no need to cancel that I could tell.
Click to expand...

Someone asked about the camera in the video comments and the reply was he has a 337 for the camera. So it is legal whether the flight was or not.
 
I've got unkind words (implied by my earlier content). I was on the ILS into SVH (there was a pretty solid cloud deck from about 3000 down to 2000. Inbound on the Hold-in-loo they called traffic at my altitude just ahead. Solid in the soup I opted for another turn in the hold until they moved off. I found out later who it was and yes indeed they were in the clouds VFR.

The other one was some guy who flew into the clouds in the RIC class C and then decided that was a bad idea and changed altitude without telling ATC. The words "Do you know how close you came to hitting another aircraft" were what I heard ATC saying.
 
flyingron said:
The other one was some guy who flew into the clouds in the RIC class C and then decided that was a bad idea and changed altitude without telling ATC. The words "Do you know how close you came to hitting another aircraft" were what I heard ATC saying.
Click to expand...

Was he IFR and just got skeered of being in the clouds?
 
Tail number visible and audible. Video or FAR violation. Posted video on YouTube. Link to YouTube on PoA. What are the odds he's looking at a timeout?
 
Captain said:
Tail number visible and audible. Video or FAR violation. Posted video on YouTube. Link to YouTube on PoA. What are the odds he's looking at a timeout?
Click to expand...

I suspect there is enough of those floating around that the FAA is too busy trying to figure out how to deal with them, if they are going after people posting U Tube videos.

But I agree it's absolutely stupid to post something like that. Personally, I think it's a bad idea to post that type of personal information on the Internet to begin with even if the flight was perfectly legal.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I suspect there is enough of those floating around that the FAA is too busy trying to figure out how to deal with them, if they are going after people posting U Tube videos.

But I agree it's absolutely stupid to post something like that. Personally, I think it's a bad idea to post that type of personal information on the Internet to begin with even if the flight was perfectly legal.
Click to expand...

You would be suprised at the number of phone calls and email to the FAA by pilots saying "Did you see that video on the Internet?"

Like I said, pilots are their own worse enemy.
 
RotorAndWing said:
You would be suprised at the number of phone calls and email to the FAA by pilots saying "Did you see that video on the Internet?"

Like I said, pilots are their own worse enemy.
Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise me at all.
 
RotorAndWing said:
You would be suprised at the number of phone calls and email to the FAA by pilots saying "Did you see that video on the Internet?"

Like I said, pilots are their own worse enemy.
Click to expand...

Is it wrong to be the enemy of someone proven to not know enough or be uncaring enough to put my life at risk?

Not my style to call, most of the time... but in cases like this one, I really can't find any fault in someone who does.

Are drivers their "own worst enemy" when reporting an erratic or possibly drunk driver to 911? No. They're doing the right thing.
 
I fly into these airports. Will probably be using both when I finally start my IFR lessons. Learned a lot of what not to do, just by watching this! Thanks for posting :).

What was the purpose of canceling IFR? I don't get it:dunno:
 
Last edited:
He flew through a cloud at 17:38 while "VFR" on the way to ISP.

He cancelled IFR on climbout from his last approach at ISP at 56:00 and then again at 1:01:23 (apparently forgot he was VFR).
 
Personally, I hope someone reports him. He has no business being in the air with those of us that are not blatantly careless.

There was another pilot with him, sounded like a cfi, so he needs "retrained" also.

He has several videos of him in this Cirrus, it sounded like this is a new aircraft to him. Is this Cirrus certified for flight into known icing? He has a "flight into known icing training" video there as well.
 
Last edited:
redtail said:
I fly into these airports. Will probably be using both when I finally start my IFR lessons. Learned a lot of what not to do, just by watching this! Thanks for posting :).

What was the purpose of canceling IFR? I don't get it:dunno:
Click to expand...

At around 56 minutes in the video his stated purpose was to lighten the load for ATC.
 
I regard being in the IFR system as a very comforting safety blanket- if conditions seem to call for it, I am in and tickled to be there. That whole "contact approach" thing, when no active IFR clearance, just ain't right.
 
IMHO one of the cornerstones of IFR is self-discipline. Not much evidence of that here. In addition the tower controller obviously had no hand off of IFR traffic since the guy cancelled, so in reality shouldn't have granted the contact approach. He might have declared an emergency and squeaked through by claiming the viz closed quickly, but posting the video was just plain dumb.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
IMHO one of the cornerstones of IFR is self-discipline. Not much evidence of that here. In addition the tower controller obviously had no hand off of IFR traffic since the guy cancelled, so in reality shouldn't have granted the contact approach. He might have declared an emergency and squeaked through by claiming the viz closed quickly, but posting the video was just plain dumb.
Click to expand...
The pilot requested a contact approach. I didn't hear the tower say it was granted. I didn't hear the tower even relay another IFR clearance. He was VFR, period.
 
kkoran said:
He cancelled IFR on climbout from his last approach at ISP at 56:00 and then again at 1:01:23 (apparently forgot he was VFR).
Click to expand...

Maybe. At 1:01:23 he says, "75T has Bridgeport in sight, we can cancel." He could have been referring to flight following.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
IMHO one of the cornerstones of IFR is self-discipline. Not much evidence of that here. In addition the tower controller obviously had no hand off of IFR traffic since the guy cancelled, so in reality shouldn't have granted the contact approach. He might have declared an emergency and squeaked through by claiming the viz closed quickly, but posting the video was just plain dumb.
Click to expand...

The tower didn't grant the contact approach.
 
roncachamp said:
Maybe. At 1:01:23 he says, "75T has Bridgeport in sight, we can cancel." He could have been referring to flight following.
Click to expand...

Based on what he did at 56 minutes I would assume that was true based on the fact that when he canceled at :56 he was told to stay on his code and then later told to squawk VFR.
 
dell30rb said:
Was he IFR and just got skeered of being in the clouds?
Click to expand...

I think it might have been an instructor or just a complete idiot. Yeah, they intentionally entered the clouds VFR and I guess after a while they decided they shouldn't be there and descended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top