Incident - Discussed with FAA

[67A1F]

I am relatively new to drones, flying about six months and am trying to learn everything I can to fly safely and stay out of trouble.

I'm making this post to inform others of the rule concerning the lack of a minimum altitude for helicopters.

I just assumed that helicopters were held to the same standards as fixed will aircraft. I was wrong ?.

Sorry if I am the only person on the planet that didn't know this reg. just wanted to put the information out their for others like myself.

I called to report the incident I'm describing, it occurred on the 20th of Feb.

FAA representative returned a call to me this morning regarding an incident that occurred last week while flying my EVO in the area of my residence.

What happened: Flying to see the sunset and make a visual check of my neighbors property (snowbirds).

Returned to home decending from max altitude to approximately 70 ft to clear power lines to enter my property.

Suddenly from the SW a military Chinook helicopter flying low level at approximately 250 to 300 feet and 125 knots enters the airspace I had just left about 10 to 15 seconds earlier.

This could have ended badly. Personally I believe this is a hole in the regulations that allows for potential deadly incidents.

So, here is the FAA rule. Pay attention to Para (d) (1) and (2)

Sec. 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.
(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface--
(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and
(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.]

 

[Ansia]

This is why is extremely imporant to always keep your drone in VLOS and to scan the areas for potential aircrafts that may be flying in the vicinity.

 

[67A1F]

This is why is extremely imporant to always keep your drone in VLOS and to scan the areas for potential aircrafts that may be flying in the vicinity.

Agreed, no question about that. My aircraft was within VLOS, however this aircraft entered the scene so low and fast over the tree line that there is no time to react. Should fixed wing aircraft be allowed low level flight as well.

 

[Tufargon]

I'm aware of it and it happens here often because people like flying over the Sacramento River. Listening is a big thing when I fly here. If I hear anything I come back down under tree level cause it can show up fast.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Low flying rules in the US
An aircraft must maintain 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.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/lgb/local_more/media/FAA_Guide_to_Low-Flying_Aircraft.pdf

 

[67A1F]

I'm aware of it and it happens here often because people like flying over the Sacramento River. Listening is a big thing when I fly here. If I hear anything I come back down under tree level cause it can show up fast.

Yes, we need to use all our senses. With this incident I did hear the Chinook, they are quite noisy. I had cleared that airspace maybe 15 seconds earlier, if I hadn’t, hearing it left little or no time to react.

In my humble opinion I don’t believe that any high speed aircraft should be able to indiscriminately fly low level. The FAA doesn’t agree. Who would take the heat if the chinook was taken down by my drone. Multi-million dollar aircraft and crew lost.

 

[67A1F]

Low flying rules in the US
An aircraft must maintain 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.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/lgb/local_more/media/FAA_Guide_to_Low-Flying_Aircraft.pdf

At the bottom of the page of the link you provided Section 91.119 para (d) is what the FAA said authorizes helicopters to fly less than 500 ft.

 

[Tufargon]

I forget where I saw it but yes. They are allowed to fly under 500 feet in certain situations and they do it a lot here.

 

[xspwhite]

The rules are pretty dum in my opinion. The rule states that no aircraft can fly under 500-feet. But after you weigh in all the exceptions, they are basically allowed to fly anywhere they want and at any altitude. It's a rule that's not a rule, so why did they bother to type it.

 

[67A1F]

The rules are pretty dum in my opinion. The rule states that no aircraft can fly under 500-feet. But after you weigh in all the exceptions, they are basically allowed to fly anywhere they want and at any altitude. It's a rule that's not a rule, so why did they bother to type it.

Not only dum but dangerous. With my incident, the drone very well could have taken down the Chinnok. Could you imagine the national news about that.

Drones would probably be grounded after multi-million dollar aircraft destroyed and air crew dead. Not to mention me being financially destroyed paying lawyers to defend myself.

The FAA inspector I talked in the Seattle office basically said helicopter low level flight is legal so it is what it is.

Sorry fo being so long winded for this post.

Regards

 

[Ansia]

Not only dum but dangerous. With my incident, the drone very well could have taken down the Chinnok. Could you imagine the national news about that.

Drones would probably be grounded after multi-million dollar aircraft destroyed and air crew dead. Not to mention me being financially destroyed paying lawyers to defend myself.

The FAA inspector I talked in the Seattle office basically said helicopter low level flight is legal so it is what it is.

Sorry fo being so long winded for this post.

Regards

If I knew I was responsible for all that. I wouldn't spend a cent on lawyers. I know where I am headed, regardless of the lawyer.

 

[waverider]

I frequently fly at a local field that is inside the NFZ of a nearby airport. Since people have flown model aircraft there since the 1950s, the FAA grants an exception to this field but limits max altitude to 250 feet. Recently they added another rule that stated that manned helicopters may “hover at low altitude” over the field at any time. If a helicopter hovers over the field all model aircraft incl drones are required to land immediately. Thing is, even old timers there said they had never seen any helicopter actually do that. Only about one week later a police chopper came down and hovered at 20 feet for several minutes for no apparent reason (that we could see.) But, everyone landed. Then the chopper flew away.

 

[67A1F]

If I knew I was responsible for all that. I wouldn't spend a cent on lawyers. I know where I am headed, regardless of the lawyer.

I would no doubt feel responsible and have to live with that. But the FAA rule would point to the culprit. It would cripple our industry.

 

[J Lo's Behind]

Not only dum but dangerous. With my incident, the drone very well could have taken down the Chinnok. Could you imagine the national news about that.

Drones would probably be grounded after multi-million dollar aircraft destroyed and air crew dead. Not to mention me being financially destroyed paying lawyers to defend myself.

The FAA inspector I talked in the Seattle office basically said helicopter low level flight is legal so it is what it is.

Sorry fo being so long winded for this post.

Regards

You really think your drone can take down a chinook?
We're talkin about a craft that can lift 13 tons and gets hit by birds that weight more than your drone all the time and has been used in air assault missions the world over in times of war.
There are Chinooks sitting at bases somewhere in the world after completed missions with holes blown into them. But your tiny drone....nevermind. That is over reacting at very high levels.
200 Evo's flying maximum speed could plow into that thing with reckless abandon, at the same time, and that thing wouldn't even notice. And forget about flying any of them into a turbine intake. The thrust that thing produces would blow your drone out of the sky like a piece of straw in a tornado.
As far as following flight rules goes, that Helicopter was probably U.S. property and those guys do as they please. The rule is 500 agl.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

 

[67A1F]

You really think your drone can take down a chinook?
We're talkin about a craft that can lift 13 tons and gets hit by birds that weight more than your drone all the time and has been used in air assault missions the world over in times of war.
There are Chinooks sitting at bases somewhere in the world after completed missions with holes blown into them. But your tiny drone....nevermind. That is over reacting at very high levels.
200 Evo's flying maximum speed could plow into that thing with reckless abandon, at the same time, and that thing wouldn't even notice. And forget about flying any of them into a turbine intake. The thrust that thing produces would blow your drone out of the sky like a piece of straw in a tornado.
As far as following flight rules goes, that Helicopter was probably U.S. property and those guys do as they please. The rule is 500 agl.

I was going to take apart your post piece by piece, but by your tone you certainly know it all. So I won't bother. Your free to have your own opinion. I have a history in US Army aviation with rotor wing and two tours of combat experience and don't have the same respect for this aircraft as you do. Have you ever been close to or flown in one of those.
Will a 1.9 lb object striking a aircraft at 125+ knots, hell yes
............never mind - Really.
I

 

[hummerbk]

I found this thread very interesting. Las Sunday I was in Las Vegas heading towards a Bass Pro Shop somewhere in the south of the city. My brother was driving on a freeway when he said "Look at that!" We looked down the road and there were three Chinooks directly over the freeway at no more than 200 feet.I doubt they were going 40 mph. They were heading north. We opened the sunroof to enjoy the sound. My brother assumed they probably had something to do with a NASCAR race that was taking place that day. I could have shot one with an arrow.

 

[67A1F]

I found this thread very interesting. Las Sunday I was in Las Vegas heading towards a Bass Pro Shop somewhere in the south of the city. My brother was driving on a freeway when he said "Look at that!" We looked down the road and there were three Chinooks directly over the freeway at no more than 200 feet.I doubt they were going 40 mph. They were heading north. We opened the sunroof to enjoy the sound. My brother assumed they probably had something to do with a NASCAR race that was taking place that day. I could have shot one with an arrow.

Interesting, it amazes me that FAA rules allow any manned aircraft to fly low level. With the exception of powered para sails, hang gliders and such.

I was a door gunner on a slick (Huey) in VN, got allot of low level flying time in. Things happen very quickly at high speed and low altitude.

In your circumstance you say the aircraft were flying directly over the freeway. I would say that should be against the rules, but what do I know. It may say somewhere in the rules that it is just fine for helicopters as well.

My direct aviation experience was a Looooooooooooong time ago. I still love the sound of rotor wing aircraft. Brings back some good memories.

Careful out there

Regards

 

[hummerbk]

Interesting, it amazes me that FAA rules allow any manned aircraft to fly low level. With the exception of powered para sails, hang gliders and such.

I was a door gunner on a slick (Huey) in VN, got allot of low level flying time in. Things happen very quickly at high speed and low altitude.

In your circumstance you say the aircraft were flying directly over the freeway. I would say that should be against the rules, but what do I know. It may say somewhere in the rules that it is just fine for helicopters as well.

My direct aviation experience was a Looooooooooooong time ago. I still love the sound of rotor wing aircraft. Brings back some good memories.

Careful out there

Regards

I don't know what the rules are. They were directly over the center lane flying against traffic and going very slowly, all three in a row. Coolest thing I ever saw.

Back in the mid 70's I had a neighbor who was a winch operator on a military helicopter. When they moved the 1550th helicopter squadron from, I think Utah, down to Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque they followed the freeways. He said the lead pilot had a Union 76 roadmap on his lap. I laughed at that but he said they had to stay near a road in case one broke down and they needed to truck it out. Makes sense, I guess.

 

[xspwhite]

They never did say whatever happened to that guy.