Night flying, near a tall building that's over 400' tall..... So long as I'm closer than 400' to the building I'm ok to go above the 400 AGL, correct? Yes, I went back and re-reviewed all my course material but want to make sure I have it right. Building btw would be 700' tall.
400' rule AGL vs proximity to building
- Thread starter veryzebra
- Start date
mobilehomer
Well-Known Member
The 400' above structures rule is not available for recreational flyers. Only Part 107.
The 400’ “bubble” isn’t available for people flying under recreational rules. Only this with a 107 are afforded this privilege. Recreational flyers have a hard 400’ limit.
Last edited by a moderator:
What's the rule in this situation? I live at the edge of a 5 mile radius of an airport. The height restriction with LAANCE is at 100 feet. There are tall residetal buildings near by that reach 300 -400 feet.
So as a recreational pilot I cannot go over 100 feet even with approval correct?
But if I had my Part 107 then what? I'v watched half a dozen videos of this exact flying spot on Youtube of people flying over the tops of these buildings, probably at 700 feet AGL. Some look armature but some look like professional Real Estate videos. Is it allowed in restricted air space assuming they have a Part 107? Is it simple to get a waiver to break that 100ft grid restriction in that area? Or are all these guys just breaking the rules and dont care?
So as a recreational pilot I cannot go over 100 feet even with approval correct?
But if I had my Part 107 then what? I'v watched half a dozen videos of this exact flying spot on Youtube of people flying over the tops of these buildings, probably at 700 feet AGL. Some look armature but some look like professional Real Estate videos. Is it allowed in restricted air space assuming they have a Part 107? Is it simple to get a waiver to break that 100ft grid restriction in that area? Or are all these guys just breaking the rules and dont care?
The grid limits in controlled airspace are the same for both §107 and recreational pilots. §107 are restricted to the grid limits unless they apply for a different altitude and that requires submission of what procedures they will implement to do it safely. The clearance they do get is a hard maximum altitude and does not allow the 400’ bubble in addition.
Thanks for the clarification. I am guessing most of those videos I have seen are just yahoos then. I would never attempt that. There's low flying helicopters buzzing around on a daily basis. Mostly police so minimum height rules don't seem to apply to them. I have seen some as low as 300 feet. I think they are exempt right?
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.
That is correct but you must take the clouds (if there are any) into consideration. Remember you need to be 500 ft under the clouds.
Helicopters are under different rules for minimum altitude than fixed wing aircraft. They can fly lower and closer to obstacles and are our biggest threat for midair collisions.
Echo4Thirty
Active Member
Police helicopters are not exempt from the 500' AGL floor, even though they like to think they are.
mobilehomer
Well-Known Member
Read this. Especially the last section. From the FAA and GPO - https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2011-title14-vol2/pdf/CFR-2011-title14-vol2-sec91-115.pdf
Police helicopters are still subject to the floor, if piloted by a civilian for civilian purposes. It's just an aircraft. /s
The helicopter being piloted by police or civilian have the same rules. Please refer to post number 14.
You miss what the /s is for...
But I think the point @Echo4Thirty is trying to make is that they are not exempt from the floor, but they think they are. It was possibly a tongue-in-cheek comment to say Law Enforcement needs to refer to Post #14. Not me. My comment was a silly joke in that no one would disagree that a civilian flying a police heli for non-gov't business is of course subject to the limits as it is a civilian using an aircraft as a civilian.
Part D (1) states "A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section," and I believe the police quit reading at that point.
Point is, clear language would indicate they are subject to the rules. A reasonable person would assume they would need a reason to do so, and the police in some places (by me) believe a badge and a gun are all the reasons necessary.
I agree, FAR 91.119 does not carve out an exemption for law enforcement aircraft for minimum altitudes.
So I take it you are inferring that there are police helicopter pilots in your area that do not adhere to §91.119(a) and are endangering people or property by flying so low there is insufficient altitude in case of engine failure.
You taught me something new ‘/s’ so I understand you were being sarcastic.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
-
Air 3 Above the Danube – From the Wachau to Bratislava
- Started by sven_D
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Can't Download GO 4 App- Started by Steve LaBranche
- Replies: 4
Forum statistics
