Caught by surprise

O

onwards

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
1,998
Location
CA
Display Name
Display name:
onwards
I was flying back from KHAF today and was on following, there were a lot of targets. Anyway, I was listening closely to make sure I was fully aware, when my passenger pointed out a very low flying high wing, maneuvring maybe 100ft above the surface, flying ahead of us towards the Golden Gate Bridge.

In a few seconds it became apparent that he was going under it.

Since I had not heard about that plane on the advisories and had no idea what he was going to do but he was straight ahead and could easily nick us from below if he decided to pull a steep climb, I got on the radio and asked NorCal if they had the guy on radar.

They confirmed and then seemed to get on the radio with him to ask if he intended to turn north after going under.

So is it legal to do this? I wanna fly under the bridge too.
 
No - better do it with the transponder off, and at night so nobody sees your tail number.
 
pericynthion said:
No - better do it with the transponder off, and at night so nobody sees your tail number.
Click to expand...

And only do it once. Martha Lunken (Flying magazine) says nobody ever gets the tail number the first time someone does something stupid.
 
If it was a helicopter, powered parachute, or weight-shift-control aircraft then it may have been legal per 91.119(d).

In no case is flying under the bridge encompassed by 91.119(b). This paragraph explicitly uses the word "over," so even if the bridge were considered a congested area the paragraph could not apply using any known meaning of the word "over".

The bridge is too low (only about 220 ft above the water) to allow an airplane to fly under and still be legal with respect to 91.119(c).
 
Be sure you understand what will happen if you do get caught, and you think it through and accept it. It's too easy to do something because you think it would be fun without thinking of the consequences.
 
Do it in a SES or MES . Duck under " for the purposes of landing..";)
 
Sarcasm fail, sorry guys. I tried :)
 
Flown under it several times. Once I even orbited under the South end for several minutes....looking for a reported jumper. ATC was very accommodating, you just open your transmission with "Coast Guard Rescue"....... :D
 
Long ago in a far off time in a distant galaxy, I might have flown a 128,000 pound truboprop transport under the bridge.....there is no official record of this, however.
 
Been under it in a helicopter. The other bridges in the bay as well. Sometimes for sport, sometimes wx makes going under safer.
 
bbchien said:
Long ago in a far off time in a distant galaxy, I might have flown a 128,000 pound truboprop transport under the bridge.....there is no official record of this, however.
Click to expand...

IF that happened, ( which of course we recognize as theoretical :D), you would have joined a select bunch which may or may not exist. :dunno: The premier member was Richard Bong, who looped a P-38 AROUND the bridge. I have heard it has been done by four-engined turboprop transports painted white, purely for training purposes of course. My experience was in sling wing machines.
 
I saw a helicopter fly under it a few days ago, and I have flown under it in a 777...
 
I have never flown under it, in a Pitts, Marchetti, PC-12 and a few others.
 
Everskyward said:
I saw a helicopter fly under it a few days ago, and I have flown under it in a 777...
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that 777 was particularly fuel efficient.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Onwards, you rat fink.......


That was me!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you're serious but if so... How did you get permission? And why didn't they mention you in the advisories?
 
I have never know the Sac Arrow to be serious. I doubt if he'll start now.
 
cherokeeflyboy said:
Do it in a SES or MES . Duck under " for the purposes of landing..";)
Click to expand...
people have been written up for that. Our practice is when you land on a river don't step taxi under a bridge, be slowed down before you get to it. We would leave my neighbor's dock at his river house, step taxi up to the bridge, slow and displacement crawl under it, then take off from the other side. Not only are you sure to be legal that way, but it's the courteous thing to do just like slowing your boat to no-wake speed when you go under the bridge.
 
onwards said:
I'm not sure if you're serious but if so... How did you get permission? And why didn't they mention you in the advisories?
Click to expand...

The Sac Arrow jokes you. But on a serious note, I saw something very similar a few weeks ago and I even posted about it. Dude in a Bonanza flew over the Bay Bridge but barely shaving the lowest portion of the cable then flew West and shaved the North Beach area of the City by maybe 200 feet above the buildings.
 
Sac Arrow said:
The Sac Arrow jokes you. But on a serious note, I saw something very similar a few weeks ago and I even posted about it. Dude in a Bonanza flew over the Bay Bridge but barely shaving the lowest portion of the cable then flew West and shaved the North Beach area of the City by maybe 200 feet above the buildings.
Click to expand...

Ah ok :)

It really caught both of us by surprise - I was giving a ride back to another pilot - especially as he was maneuvering right and left buzzing the sail boats before making the straight in under the bridge - but I guess it's allowed somehow. NorCal seemed fine with it.
 
onwards said:
Ah ok :)

It really caught both of us by surprise - I was giving a ride back to another pilot - especially as he was maneuvering right and left buzzing the sail boats before making the straight in under the bridge - but I guess it's allowed somehow. NorCal seemed fine with it.
Click to expand...

Either that or they didn't want to deal with it. Flying 100 feet AGL over the ocean in itself is fine. Could well have been an LEO or other public agency operated aircraft which I understand can operate under a different set of rules.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
The United ones at stapleton?
I got to fly a United 777 there, a friend of mine knows a guy that works with the simulators.
Click to expand...
:yes: I'll also mention that my FO was another female pilot on POA. ;)
 
pericynthion said:
No - better do it with the transponder off, and at night so nobody sees your tail number.
Click to expand...

Reading between the lines, It sounds like controllers were ignoring this guy but had to respond to him once you asked them about him. So that was their way of telling him he is on radar.
 
bartmc said:
Yeah, sure, it's legal, go for it.
Click to expand...

Rusty what do you allocate or reserve for maintenance for your landing gear only and for your prop? Just wondering how it compares to Comanche with a hartzel.

Engine reserve $14
Prop reserve $4
Landing gear $2

something along that lines?
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
Reading between the lines, It sounds like controllers were ignoring this guy but had to respond to him once you asked them about him. So that was their way of telling him he is on radar.
Click to expand...

Stated another way.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top