Low Flying Aircraft

[Flying Shroppie]

Yesterday I was out giving my drone a flight. Weather conditions for once were good, I live in an area where there are no flying restrictions but as my house is approximately 12 miles from the helicopter training base at RAF Shawbury I am very careful about when I fly as the area around where I live is devoid of other houses and is regularly used by pilots under instruction for very low level flying.
I checked that there were no helis about (it was just after lunch time) and presumably all the pilots were still in the messroom. I was flying at about 375 feet and in clear view. Suddenly I heard a small private aircraft approaching so as a precautionary measure I started to bring the Mavic Pro down and it was at about 250-275 feet when this aircraft passed UNDERNEATH my drone. I doubt very much if the pilot would have seen it. The plane then turned and headed towards Sleap Airfield which is about 6 miles away and is used by a large number of recreational pilots. Because it all happened so quickly I was unable to get any identifying markings other than the colour and shape of the wings.
Do I go and speak to the people in the control tower or just keep my head down . From my research private aircraft are not allowed to fly lower than 500ft which should, in theory, give a 100ft separation to the ceiling for drones.
Any thoughts?

 

[Gagey52]

Your dead right, light aircraft are not supposed to fly lower than 500 and we are not allowed above 400 hence a separation of 100. Shame you didn’t have your video on.
Regards

 

[Kywon McCain]

How many feet was between your drone and the angry plane?

 

[Heindrich1988]

When I was holidaying in Sanya, China, there was a beach where it was very common to see people flying drones (like you'd see 2 or 3 on a walk along the beach for an hour or two)... it was completely legal and beach security guards didn't mind.

At the same time, there were helicopter and sea plane tours along the same beach. I'm pretty sure the helicopters are supposed to stay clear of the beach itself and stay above a certain altitude, but many pilots, trying to give their customers a more thrilling experience, would go right up to the beach and below 50m.

So yes, I've also had the crazy experience of raising altitude to ensure I avoided a collision when my spotter saw an approaching helicopter flying lower than my drone.

Perhaps drone strikes don't do much to helicopters, because that's like the busiest beach in China, and those helicopters tours are non-stop during daylight hours. I haven't heard of any incidents there.

 

[Starz]

Same exact scenario happened to me last year. The comments that came back was that I was the bad guy. Was no way I was in the right according to the experts. Had the “pilot” of the fixed wing received a Matrice 210 V2 through his windshield, I have no doubt it would not have been a good day for him. The only evidence that would have cleared the air(no pun intended)would have been the flight log from the drone indicating an altitude of 350 feet.
I do believe that an incident like this will happen at some point and not have a good outcome.
Hopefully not involving one of my aircraft.
Be safe guys!

 

[GFields]

Glad you worked it out!

 

[Cymruflyer]

Your dead right, light aircraft are not supposed to fly lower than 500 and we are not allowed above 400 hence a separation of 100. Shame you didn’t have your video on.
Regards

That is an incorrect statement. Know before making comments, so as not to confuse other readers. An aircraft may fly lower than 500 ft when it is in an area that is sparsely populated, as long as it is safe to do so. When out in the country, a pilot can drop down onto the deck if they wish. However if there are animals, walkers or a building, then the pilot must give a wide clearance to that object on the ground. Same thing applies over water, you can drop down to the deck over water, even just off shore of a beach, but again you need to give a wide berth to anyone in the water or any watercraft.

I'm surprised you could not have dropped lower than you did, before the aircraft got to you. An airplane can be heard from a good distance away which give a drone flyer plenty of time to get down low to the ground. The only thing that would make that not so easy to hear from a distance, is if the wind was blowing away from you towards the incoming aircraft, that would reduce the time from when you hear it, but not by too much unless it was very strong wind.

Just for your info, even when we are allowed to fly right down on the deck in open spaces, most pilots choose not to do that because if you encounter any sort of engine problem, you have only a few seconds to sort it out, if there is a power drop. Hence when flying in an aircraft, there is safety in altitude because it gives a pilot time to sort out a problem before they have to put the aircraft down. As much fun as it is flying low skimming over tree tops, 99.9% of pilots choose not to do that because power lines or telephone cables are almost impossible to see, other than tell tale towers that hold them up, so it is a dangerous thing to do.

 

[tjp505]

In the UK this is what Civil Aviation Authority says about low flying:
Report a potential breach of aviation law | UK Civil Aviation Authority

 

[DoomMeister]

That is an incorrect statement. Know before making comments, so as not to confuse other readers. An aircraft may fly lower than 500 ft when it is in an area that is sparsely populated, as long as it is safe to do so. When out in the country, a pilot can drop down onto the deck if they wish. However if there are animals, walkers or a building, then the pilot must give a wide clearance to that object on the ground. Same thing applies over water, you can drop down to the deck over water, even just off shore of a beach, but again you need to give a wide berth to anyone in the water or any watercraft.

I'm surprised you could not have dropped lower than you did, before the aircraft got to you. An airplane can be heard from a good distance away which give a drone flyer plenty of time to get down low to the ground. The only thing that would make that not so easy to hear from a distance, is if the wind was blowing away from you towards the incoming aircraft, that would reduce the time from when you hear it, but not by too much unless it was very strong wind.

Just for your info, even when we are allowed to fly right down on the deck in open spaces, most pilots choose not to do that because if you encounter any sort of engine problem, you have only a few seconds to sort it out, if there is a power drop. Hence when flying in an aircraft, there is safety in altitude because it gives a pilot time to sort out a problem before they have to put the aircraft down. As much fun as it is flying low skimming over tree tops, 99.9% of pilots choose not to do that because power lines or telephone cables are almost impossible to see, other than tell tale towers that hold them up, so it is a dangerous thing to do.

That applied to flights in the USA under jurisdiction of the FAA. I believe the UK has similar rules, but it would be best to reference the applicable statutes of the CAA.

 

[hiflyer201]

allowed to fly lower than 500ft which should, in theory, give a 100ft separation to the ceiling for drones.
Any thoughts?

That's not a true. There is a rule that you are not allowed to fly as to endanger people or property and 500 ft is considered minimum over lightly populated areas. One might keep in mind the property you damage could be the property of the insurance company covering the aircraft. Please remember that aircraft can glide to a safe landing. The rules for drones are different for one reason because they can't.

 

[Cymruflyer]

You guys need to understand what the rules are and not just spout out info about 500ft. I am British and a British pilot as well as a US pilot and instructor.

Your 500ft that some of you keep repeating is 500ft away or around someone on the ground. If you are in open country or sparsely populated areas, whether in the UK or in the US, you are legally allowed to fly as low as is safely responsible. What you must adhere to when flying like this, is not to overfly a person or building and really not animals either. When you come upon any of the three just mentioned, you are to leave a wide birth of at least 500ft around that person, object or animal (though some feel that animals are a grey area).

When you fly over a village, you must be at least 1,000ft above the highest point of that village. So if the village was at sea level and it had a church with a 100 ft spire, you must fly a minimum of 1,100ft above that village unless it happened to be 4,000 feet wide, the village that is. If that were the case, then you can fly at the 1,000ft altitude, as long as you were not closer than just about 1,800ft away from that 100 ft spire.

Now if the village was densely populated and 3 miles long and wide, then you would have to fly even higher as a safe minimum, than the 1,000ft I just mentioned, because there is another law that states you must fly in a safer manner that would not bring risk to people or building on the ground. That means that you should always fly in such a manner that if you had an engine out situation, you would be able to glide to a safe landing in a clear area and not have to crash into that village. That is why we always say there is safety in altitude.

As I mentioned you can drop down to the deck when flying in open areas, unless otherwise restricted of course, but most pilots would not do that because they value their well being and want altitude, to sort out a problem that may arise, which would give them minutes to get things sorted out. If you are below 500ft legally, you only have seconds if something comes up, before you are contacting the ground. I hope that clears things up, so forget that magic 500ft number unless you really know what it means.

We used to have a rule in the UK that said we had to fly a minimum of 1,500 ft above the highest point of a village or built up area which was outside of the international rules, without going into detail. So way back in the early 2,000s the UK adopted the same rule that the rest of the world has and that was the 1,000ft minimum. Of course the ability to glide clear still stands, for any flight over a built up area, should you suffer an engine out situation. Therefore these hard and fast number can vary depending on the situation. So just remember there is no hard and fast rule that it is always a minimum of 500ft AGL when it comes to aircraft that people sit in, to fly. Hope this clears it up.

 

[Cymruflyer]

That's not a true. There is a rule that you are not allowed to fly as to endanger people or property and 500 ft is considered minimum over lightly populated areas. One might keep in mind the property you damage could be the property of the insurance company covering the aircraft. Please remember that aircraft can glide to a safe landing. The rules for drones are different for one reason because they can't.

500ft what???? Away from, above???? Read the rules, they are very clear.

 

[Ty Pilot]

No where in the rules for UAV pilots here in the US (recreational or commercial) does it fall to a drone pilot to determine whether or not a manned aircraft is in the right airspace - it does NOT matter whether they should be there or not, a UAV pilot must avoid manned aviation always. Period.

I think UAV pilots (at least here in the US) need to understand that manned aviation has the right of way in ANY situation (breaking their rules or not). We are to 'see and avoid' them - that is 'our' rule. When we get caught up in what rules apply to manned aviation we lose focus of our job as UAV pilot's. There is no situation in which a UAV has right over airspace occupied by any manned aircraft.

 

[Starz]

The discussion went pretty much as I thought it would.
Fixed wing pilots can do no wrong.
Until you guys are willing to admit that as human beings, pilots or not,
mistakes can be made, class is over.
Do I think the UAV crowd makes more mistakes than they should, no doubt in my mind as I read through these forums. They do.
Do I think credentialed fixed wing pilots are immune from making mistakes, no. Not based on what I’ve seen with my own eyes.

It’s my opinion based on a real life experience that won’t soon be forgotten.

 

[Starz]

Your dead right, light aircraft are not supposed to fly lower than 500 and we are not allowed above 400 hence a separation of 100. Shame you didn’t have your video on.
Regards

Not correct information.

 

[Gagey52]

Sorry about that comment I forgot to allow for the Yank factor. Please note

Low-flying aircraft​

There are regulations that cover how low an aircraft can lawfully fly. Flying below these heights can be a breach of the regulations, although there are situations where low flying is permitted. These situations include, but are not limited to:

• flying in the course of taking off, landing or conducting a missed approach
• flying in accordance with instructions from an air traffic controller
• undertaking certain kinds of specialised aerial work, for example, power line inspection, geographical survey work, aerial firefighting, agricultural spraying.

The regulations usually require that pilots fly no lower than 1000 feet over built-up areas, or 500 feet over any other area, and we may investigate low flying incidents.
To investigate a low flying incident, we need enough information to identify the aircraft. Photographs are helpful, and details of the aircraft’s registration number, type, make and model as well as the date and time of day the low-flying activity should be provided if possible.
You can report a low-flying aircraft by completing a report a low flying aircraft form, along with any information to support your complaint.
That’s from CASA in Australia
Regards

 

[Flying Shroppie]

My report seems to have created more questions than answers. The comments regarding flying lower than 500ft when clear of structures and animals did not apply in my case as I was stood approximately 40ft from my own house. The house is surrounded on three sides by tall trees and the plane approached from behind a belt of trees and that is the reason I did not see or hear it.

 

[Cymruflyer]

My report seems to have created more questions than answers. The comments regarding flying lower than 500ft when clear of structures and animals did not apply in my case as I was stood approximately 40ft from my own house. The house is surrounded on three sides by tall trees and the plane approached from behind a belt of trees and that is the reason I did not see or hear it.

That along with wind blowing toward the aircraft would make it more difficult to hear until it was very close. As for being all trees around, that is also allowed to be flown close to. They would just have to give your house at least 500ft around it, clearance. You stated you were out in the middle of nowhere, so the pilot was probably doing no wrong. Very few properly trained and safety conscious pilots would be flying at 500ft, let alone lower, over a forest, because you have no where to go if the engine stops.

Flying that low over such terrain is again, flying foolishly and with risk. The pilot would be taught to always fly in a manner that would allow them to safely glide to a clear emergency landing spot, should they suffer an engine out. That means no flying low, even at 1,000ft over a larger forest, because you would most likely have nowhere to put it down. Obviously there are bad pilots out there, just as we see bad drivers and bad boaters etc. but they are in the minority.

 

[DoomMeister]

Thank you @Cymruflyer for clarifying your credentials. I was quite certain that the rules were very similar for both the UK and the USA.

When I am in Michigan I fly at my friend’s farm and it is remote enough that there can be very low flying aircraft. The Air National Guard flies in that area and they can get very low at times.

@Ty Pilot has a very legitimate point about our responsibilities as sUAS pilots. It is up to us to avoid manned aviation whether they are in compliance or not. In the event there was ever a mid air collision and the manned aircraft was not in compliance I’m sure it would weigh on the investigation as long as the sUAS pilot was doing their best to avoid the collision and yield right of way.

 

[Micktss]

Your dead right, light aircraft are not supposed to fly lower than 500 and we are not allowed above 400 hence a separation of 100. Shame you didn’t have your video on.
Regards

Not Quite
The 500 feet rule

Except with the permission in writing of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure

Also, think of 500 feet as a bubble around the plane.. the pilot could, in theory, be 100 feet off the ground and 500 from your house