Would you fly this low over water?

dtuuri said:
No kidding. Like most other youtubie movie stars he never looks out the window for traffic either.

dtuuri
Click to expand...
In fairness though, he wasn't alone, though it's not clear what qualifications his pax had.
 
azure said:
In fairness though, he wasn't alone, though it's not clear what qualifications his pax had.
Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't notice a passenger in the snippet I watched. In that case it's the passenger's fault for not pointing out the altitude excursion. Probably didn't want to spoil the movie. What about ATC too? Weren't they annoying, always interrupting. The nerve.

I think the plane needs a new paint scheme, say mustard yellow, to go with the hot dog inside.

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
No kidding. Like most other youtubie movie stars he never looks out the window for traffic either.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

This will be my last post/reply. So you will have to latch on someone else to try to belittle.

I deleted the videos because what started out to be uploading of different flights and conditions to share some of my experiences with others turned into what seems like a WITCHHUNT, it's un-believable some of the nasty comments and treatment by those who appear to have nothing better to do but pick apart the videos frame by frame looking for faults. I don't need the added aggravation.

What a misinformed statement that I never look out the window for traffic, Sir, you are either misinformed or uninformed.

1. Yes, 5000 was assigned, I was in VFR conditions with the ATC controller not sure to assign 4000 or 6000, MEA there is 2000, human error for a few seconds, the plane was on a gradual decent to 4,600, nobody points out that a few seconds later I was then assigned 4000 when ATC decided on an altitude.

2. For the flight over homes after Folsom Lake to Auburn, I stay mainly over the canyon to the east and climb as I enter the subdivision to maintain proper altitude.

3. Seems that "no good deed goes unpunished" when trying to share my knowledge and experience with others.

4. Every flight I take I notice myself or others making small mistakes, controllers included, no flight is ever perfectly executed, we make adjustments "on the fly", that is experienced and professional flying.

5. Yes I fly on edge, I have 2,700 hours and 30 years of complex high performance hands on flying experience including hard IFR and any number of hazardous VFR weather conditions, this makes me a better pilot.

6. Some of you on this Forum who put my flights under a microscope and criticize and bash and make a big deal out of nothing are those who probably should not be in the left seat in any aircraft.

7. For those who watch and enjoy my videos, thank you and never stop learning.
 
Last edited:
N3318Q said:
This will be my last post/reply. So you will have to latch on someone else to try to belittle.

What a misinformed statement that I never look out the window for traffic, Sir, you are either misinformed or uninformed.

1. Yes, 5000 was assigned, I was in VFR conditions with the ATC controller not sure to assign 4000 or 6000, MEA there is 2000, human error for a few seconds, the plane was on a gradual decent to 4,600, nobody points out that a few seconds later I was then assigned 4000 when ATC decided on an altitude.

2. For the flight over homes after Folsom Lake to Auburn, I stay mainly over the canyon to the east and climb as I enter the subdivision to maintain proper altitude.

3. Seems that "no good deed goes unpunished" when trying to share my knowledge and experience with others.

4. Every flight I take I notice myself or others making small mistakes, controllers included, no flight is ever perfectly executed, we make adjustments "on the fly", that is experienced and professional flying.

5. Yes I fly on edge, I have 2,700 hours and 30 years of complex high performance hands on flying experience including hard IFR and any number of hazardous VFR weather conditions, this makes me a better pilot.

6. Some of you on this Forum who put my flights under a microscope and criticize and bash and make a big deal out of nothing are those who probably should not be in the left seat in any aircraft.

7. For those who watch and enjoy my videos, thank you and never stop learning.
Click to expand...
I am glad this is his last post, because the more he tries to defend his actions, the more it solidifies the fact that he is not the 'better pilot' he claims to be.
 
N3318Q said:
This will be my last post/reply. So you will have to latch on someone else to try to belittle.
Click to expand...
You took your shtick public and deserve to be bashed for it. Turning on course right after rotation told me all I need to know about you. Even AG pilots, who are allowed such shenanigans, have restrictions on the practice:
§137.45 Nonobservance of airport traffic pattern.

Notwithstanding part 91 of this chapter, the pilot in command of an aircraft may deviate from an airport traffic pattern when authorized by the control tower concerned. At an airport without a functioning control tower, the pilot in command may deviate from the traffic pattern if—

(a) Prior coordination is made with the airport management concerned;

(b) Deviations are limited to the agricultural aircraft operation;

(c) Except in an emergency, landing and takeoffs are not made on ramps, taxiways, or other areas of the airport not intended for such use; and

(d) The aircraft at all times remains clear of, and gives way to, aircraft conforming to the traffic pattern for the airport.
​


N3318Q said:
What a misinformed statement that I never look out the window for traffic, Sir, you are either misinformed or uninformed.
Click to expand...
When you're in VMC, I want to see your head and shoulders craning for traffic not holding a map up to the camera. Far too many seconds elapsed occupied by ATC requirements, instrument scan (albeit, ineffectively) and non-essential preening for the camera to prevent a midair collision.

N3318Q said:
1. Yes, 5000 was assigned, I was in VFR conditions with the ATC controller not sure to assign 4000 or 6000, MEA there is 2000, human error for a few seconds, the plane was on a gradual decent to 4,600, nobody points out that a few seconds later I was then assigned 4000 when ATC decided on an altitude.
Click to expand...
You were on an IFR flight plan, as I understand it, with an assigned altitude. So what if they gave you a choice of 4000 or 6000 afterwards, you already busted your altitude due to poor cockpit discipline.

N3318Q said:
3. Seems that "no good deed goes unpunished" when trying to share my knowledge and experience with others.
Click to expand...
What you actually shared was example after example of bad piloting.

dtuuri
 
N3318Q said:
This will be my last post/reply. So you will have to latch on someone else to try to belittle.

What a misinformed statement that I never look out the window for traffic, Sir, you are either misinformed or uninformed.

1. Yes, 5000 was assigned, I was in VFR conditions with the ATC controller not sure to assign 4000 or 6000, MEA there is 2000, human error for a few seconds, the plane was on a gradual decent to 4,600, nobody points out that a few seconds later I was then assigned 4000 when ATC decided on an altitude.

2. For the flight over homes after Folsom Lake to Auburn, I stay mainly over the canyon to the east and climb as I enter the subdivision to maintain proper altitude.

3. Seems that "no good deed goes unpunished" when trying to share my knowledge and experience with others.

4. Every flight I take I notice myself or others making small mistakes, controllers included, no flight is ever perfectly executed, we make adjustments "on the fly", that is experienced and professional flying.

5. Yes I fly on edge, I have 2,700 hours and 30 years of complex high performance hands on flying experience including hard IFR and any number of hazardous VFR weather conditions, this makes me a better pilot.

6. Some of you on this Forum who put my flights under a microscope and criticize and bash and make a big deal out of nothing are those who probably should not be in the left seat in any aircraft.

7. For those who watch and enjoy my videos, thank you and never stop learning.
Click to expand...

1. What are "VFR conditions"? You busted your altitude big time. Blaming ATC for that? Good god...

2. You bust the 500ft rule, big time.

3. I'd rather not get any of your knowledge, if it leads to decision making like that.

4. "small" mistakes? Getting low altitude and no gear warnings from tower, and busting altitude by almost 500ft? Tell that to any DPE.

5. So 90 hours per year? Not impressed.

Even though I enjoyed the videos, I would never be a passenger in a plane where you are the PIC. My will to live is higher than my need to experience your bravado.
 
Pinstriper said:
Again it's the lens and the haters on this page that make it seem like he's too low
Click to expand...

Ahem.

At 7:30, he's scud running under an overcast low enough to obscure the top of the highest building in downtown San Francisco. According to the chart, that's an 881 MSL or lower ceiling. There is no way he could be 1000 feet up, and if downtown San Francisco isn't a congested area, nothing is.

Afterward, he cuts his cloud clearances VERY close, presuming he got over 700 feet. There is no way that's 500 below.

At least this time, he edited out the shots when it was obvious he was going to overfly a ship or a structure (or Alcatraz) and he couldn't have been more than 400 feet up.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
Ahem.

At 7:30, he's scud running under an overcast low enough to obscure the top of the highest building in downtown San Francisco. According to the chart, that's an 881 MSL or lower ceiling. There is no way he could be 1000 feet up, and if downtown San Francisco isn't a congested area, nothing is.

Afterward, he cuts his cloud clearances VERY close, presuming he got over 700 feet. There is no way that's 500 below.

At least this time, he edited out the shots when it was obvious he was going to overfly a ship or a structure (or Alcatraz) and he couldn't have been more than 400 feet up.
Click to expand...

Based on the view as he goes over the SF National Historic Maritime Park, I estimated between 350-400 ft. But what the heck, it's just a national park...located in a congested area. Doesn't everyone enjoy touring a park with GA aircraft flying overhead a low altitude?
 
Go pros are the new "hold my beer and watch this" devices. he's old and bold for sure . It may catch up to him one day
 
Pinstriper said:
Go pros are the new "hold my beer and watch this" devices. he's old and bold for sure . It may catch up to him one day
Click to expand...

And if it doesn't, his low-level flying (zooming over the Marina District at what couldn't be more than 400agl) will help the slow kill of GA. :mad:
 
Velocity173 said:
Based on the view as he goes over the SF National Historic Maritime Park, I estimated between 350-400 ft. But what the heck, it's just a national park...located in a congested area. Doesn't everyone enjoy touring a park with GA aircraft flying overhead a low altitude?
Click to expand...

I'm also wondering how he managed to get across the Golden Gate Bridge VFR with an 800 foot overcast. One frame, he's on the west side overflying a boat. On the next, he's over the Marina on the other side. The bridge deck is 500 feet up. There is no way to get across this 500 feet from obstacles without being either wet or in the clouds.

I doubt an IFR clearance will be forthcoming at such a low altitude, and especially so close to an obstruction.

This makes me a bit nervous flying around this airspace. Though I guess I'm clear if I maintain sensible altitudes….
 
MAKG1 said:
I'm also wondering how he managed to get across the Golden Gate Bridge VFR with an 800 foot overcast. One frame, he's on the west side overflying a boat. On the next, he's over the Marina on the other side. The bridge deck is 500 feet up. There is no way to get across this 500 feet from obstacles without being either wet or in the clouds.

I doubt an IFR clearance will be forthcoming at such a low altitude, and especially so close to an obstruction.

This makes me a bit nervous flying around this airspace. Though I guess I'm clear if I maintain sensible altitudes….
Click to expand...
Nah, in the vid he was always east of the bridge. However, the obscuration of the towers was only 2/3's the way up, putting the ceiling at 500 feet. He is almost perfectly at the bridge deck level, which is 220 feet above the ocean. VFR cloud clearance? We don't need no steengking VFR cloud clearance! The more I see of these vids, the more I see hot-doggin' and p*ssed-off people on the ground.
 
Aeric said:
Nah, in the vid he was always east of the bridge. However, the obscuration of the towers was only 2/3's the way up, putting the ceiling at 500 feet. He is almost perfectly at the bridge deck level, which is 220 feet above the ocean. VFR cloud clearance? We don't need no steengking VFR cloud clearance! The more I see of these vids, the more I see hot-doggin' and p*ssed-off people on the ground.
Click to expand...

You're right. Fort Point is the clue.

But THAT low, he's in class G (E goes down to 700), so cloud clearances are not the issue. 91.119 is.
 
Just unbelievable... At 9:09 he confirms he is at 600' ("that's me") and then informs the controller he will proceed in at 1000'. There is no way he could climb to 1000' without going into the clouds. The scene then jumps to Oakland.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Yesterday, I flew the Hudson River exclusion for the first time. I departed KFRG flew west along the Long Island coastline and then dropped down to 400 under the Bravo. I called Kennedy and they actually gave me "cleared into the Bravo at or below 1400"... NICE.

They were landing on 31, if they were using 4/22 no way would that happen.
 
orange said:
Yesterday, I flew the Hudson River exclusion for the first time. I departed KFRG flew west along the Long Island coastline and then dropped down to 400 under the Bravo. I called Kennedy and they actually gave me "cleared into the Bravo at or below 1400"... NICE.

They were landing on 31, if they were using 4/22 no way would that happen.
Click to expand...

Pretty different situation.

San Francisco Bay has mountains (islands) poking out of it, bridges, tall buildings near the edge, 150 foot cruise ships, and so on. Jamaica Bay has … nothing.

And there is a world of difference between 1500 feet and 500 feet. If your engine quits at 500 feet, you have maybe 30 seconds before you swim, if you do everything perfectly. Even a few seconds of WTF can shorten that disproportionately. That's time enough to configure for emergency landing, and that's it. Not enough if you don't do it immediately (flaps take a while to deploy and you can't turn off the electrics first).
 
Last edited:
If I did something I knew to be safe and legal and put it up on the net, no way anyone would get me to take it down on matter how badly they got their knickers in a twist.
 
steingar said:
If I did something I knew to be safe and legal and put it up on the net, no way anyone would get me to take it down on matter how badly they got their knickers in a twist.
Click to expand...
Emphasis on those critical words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top