How to identify a low flying pilot

LongRoadBob said:
We don't, as far as I could see, know what the OP dislikes (the noise, perceived danger in case of forced landing, spying, etc.) about this. And we don't know if it really is the same plane or not. He does claim he doesn't want to cause trouble but just talk to the pilot (if it is one pilot). I'm not sure, but isn't it kind of strange of it really is only one airplane doing this?
When I started flying lessons, I also noticed how the noise is way less than one would think, and as you say, short duration. Leaf blowers are way more annoying, and last for hours. As do many things.At our airport we have rules also for noise reduction, that we follow. We also are not allowed touch and go, unfortunately.But all that said, some of the aggressive, condescending, put downs for someone asking pilots a reasonable question seem counter productive. Some helpful responses here too, to which the op showed gratitude.To me the bottom line, small airports are in the endangered species list. I'm living in Norway now, (it's worse here...airport closings, plans for moving out to the country get met with mayors of small towns seeing no upside, if just a few constituents make trouble, plans get dashed.) but my father worked for some years for the AOPA in the Midwest, and almost all of his time was spent trying to keep small airports from being closed. Trying to get new ones,
The main point, it doesn't seem smart to go into attack mode, or correct. Confrontation will harden hearts that otherwise might be amenable. Some people of course are just against all airports near them, and yet it isn't helpful to assume anyone that asks is looking to make trouble and start a campaign to complain.
Don't we need all the good will we can get?
Click to expand...


The benevolant turn the other cheek approach certainly has it's place and value, but sometimes you need to stand up early, and bite back.

History shows, if you don't meet this particular subject head on from the start, you lose. Worrying about keeping the peace is irrelevant. In their eyes you are already the enemy. They need to understand that you understand.

They have a loaded gun pointed at your friends head. Are you one who will allow the crook to shoot your friend, and then be the next victim, or are you the one who will stand up and take action? It's that simple. Wake up.
 
OP needs to be more like this guy



Art Rose said:
The benevolant turn the other cheek approach certainly has it's place and value, but sometimes you need to stand up early, and bite back.

History shows, if you don't meet this particular subject head on from the start, you lose. Worrying about keeping the peace is irrelevant. In their eyes you are already the enemy. They need to understand that you understand.

They have a loaded gun pointed at your friends head. Are you one who will allow the crook to shoot your friend, and then be the next victim, or are you the one who will stand up and take action? It's that simple. Wake up.
Click to expand...


Are you referencing the above to a pilot flying a little low?
Really? Lol

Do you live in a big city?
 
WMorgan said:
Hi Everybody:

I'm not a pilot myself but I do respect what you've all invested in order to get where you are. Getting a license does not appear to be easy. I was hoping I could ask for a little advice.

I've got a low altitude flyer in my area who makes repeated passes and I'd like to identify this pilot. It's a private craft out of a municipal airport in Florida. The local tower told me that they have no way of identifying the guy. That didn't sound right to me. Due to his flight path I'm unable to get his tail number.

Anybody have any suggestions? I'm writing on behalf of an entire community. :)

Thanks for your help,
Will
Click to expand...
Hello Will,
I do not know if you understand what Post #21 and 23 where saying to you.

Airports sometimes have what we call Approaches that allow airplanes to land when the weather is bad or the clouds are low and they cannot see the runway. The FAA set these up and tell us what direction and altitude to fly. They setup precise instruments on the airport that we can follow with instruments in our planes and guide us through the clouds (Blind) to the runway. This is called IFR Instrument Flight Rules. When you are IFR rated pilot you are required to practice these procedures several times a year. Some pilots like to practice every month or more just to stay sharp.

Now back to what post #21 and 23 where saying, your house is sitting underneath a pathway setup by the FAA for Runway 36 at St Pete - Clearwater Airport. The planes you are seeing are practicing an Approach to that runway.

To answer your question I do not know of a way to identify a plane/pilot without the numbers but I do not know if knowing the numbers will help you if the pilot is practicing he approach. This plane could belong to a flight school that is teaching pilots on IFR approaches. Our local airport gets hundreds of planes practicing each month.

I am sorry for the noise.
 
azure said:
I agree with @LongRoadBob. Don't make an enemy out of someone who may be only a concerned citizen. And for all we know the plane in question may really be buzzing the neighborhood.

Many airports are under attack, sometimes from people with considerable influence (read: $$$). There is a field not too far from here, Parlin Field 2B3 in NH. Off the departure path from 30 lives one of the 1%, a Luger if memory serves, who has raised a huge stink over planes overflying his residence. He and his allies nearly convinced the town to close the airport a couple of years ago. There are special noise abatement procedures in place to avoid antagonizing him further, and the local pilots will tell you the story of Mr. Luger's NIMBYism on request.

We have enough enemies as is, no need to make more.
Click to expand...
He's under a class Bravo with a 1200 foot shelf, and inside a class Delta on a approach leg that's published to 600 feet. Look at the airspace. He's going to get "buzzed", and it's not illegal and an airplane at or nearly at idle floating over your house when you live where he does is not really a nuisance, it's a fact of life.
 
Salty said:
He's under a class Bravo with a 1200 foot shelf, and inside a class Delta on a approach leg that's published to 600 feet. Look at the airspace. He's going to get "buzzed", and it's not illegal and an airplane at or nearly at idle floating over your house when you live where he does is not really a nuisance, it's a fact of life.
Click to expand...
All the more reason not to antagonize someone making inquiries about someone they think might be buzzing them. And I wasn't saying that he was, only that since we really have no idea of his altitude, for all we know this guy might be cruising over at 300 AGL or something and the OP might have a genuine beef.

My main point was, we just don't know who WMorgan is, who he knows, what his connections or influence might be, or for that matter, what his actual beef with this pilot is. If he's rich or well-connected, the last thing you want to do is turn him into another Mr. Luger. :no:
 
LongRoadBob said:
To be fair here, the OP (at least believes he...) is talking about one airplane, not all small planes. He also took the time to make an account here, and seek advice from real pilots about his issue. His post, and successive ones are respectful, and he admits from the start he doesn't know what the rules are so he asked.

Some seem to want to put him down, because he is asking about a concern he has, though he hasn't named what the concern is exactly, and here the pilot community had a chance to followup, and give him the information. Of course, more details are needed but some here at least tried to tell him the rules we follow, and the regulations on such matters. Others decided to be rude, and condescending. It makes a difference.

The rudeness could just be another nail in the coffin, turning a neutral person into one against small planes, and particularly pilots, and airports. He may vote. He may tell others the experience he received from pilots when asking a simple question.
Click to expand...
+2
 
Sorry, I'm not a fan of pretending something is a problem that isn't, just to try to pacify someone that likely isn't going to be pacified because we pretended. I wouldn't want this guy coming to find me; I can see zero good coming from that encounter.
 
Art Rose said:
The benevolant turn the other cheek approach certainly has it's place and value, but sometimes you need to stand up early, and bite back.

History shows, if you don't meet this particular subject head on from the start, you lose. Worrying about keeping the peace is irrelevant. In their eyes you are already the enemy. They need to understand that you understand.

They have a loaded gun pointed at your friends head. Are you one who will allow the crook to shoot your friend, and then be the next victim, or are you the one who will stand up and take action? It's that simple. Wake up.
Click to expand...

One may choose to turn the other cheek when one is attacked. We haven't been attacked, and if we see every question as an attack and fire back we make enemies of potential friends. How hard is this?

If you treat anyone daring to question you as an enemy, you create an enemy. Read what the person wrote, he wasn't against GA, he had a question. He should have been treated kindly. He should have not had to hear how he had n o life, or was a PITA. You can end up being your own worst enemy when trying to clamp down.
 
LongRoadBob said:
One may choose to turn the other cheek when one is attacked. We haven't been attacked, and if we see every question as an attack and fire back we make enemies of potential friends. How hard is this?

If you treat anyone daring to question you as an enemy, you create an enemy. Read what the person wrote, he wasn't against GA, he had a question. He should have been treated kindly. He should have not had to hear how he had n o life, or was a PITA. You can end up being your own worst enemy when trying to clamp down.
Click to expand...
My statement was not actually addressed directly to the OP, but I removed it anyway.
 
Salty said:
Sorry, I'm not a fan of pretending something is a problem that isn't, just to try to pacify someone that likely isn't going to be pacified because we pretended. I wouldn't want this guy coming to find me; I can see zero good coming from that encounter.
Click to expand...
No one is suggesting to pretend something is a problem. We have good reason, as you say, to believe it probably isn't, but we just don't know for sure. Again, my main point was to reinforce what @LongRoadBob said about not turning someone into an enemy. With that I will bow out of this exchange.
 
This could be solved if developers quit building houses close to airports that have been there for decades , but that’s not going to happen. If you buy a house next to an airport, when disclosed, its on you, similar to farming and railroad tracks.
 
Palmpilot said:
Looking at the terminal area chart, it occurs to me that since most of the bay has a 1200-foot bravo floor, VFR traffic coming to St. Pete from the southeast would be below 1200 if they didn't have a bravo clearance. Maybe that's what's going on.

https://skyvector.com/?ll=27.788466430621625,-82.714182538671&chart=129&zoom=4&fpl=GIBBS WHITD SONES KPIE
Click to expand...
Extremely likely, and what I believe @Salty was suggesting. We just don't know for sure what is actually happening, since the OP doesn't have a very good method of estimating the plane's altitude.
 
Now it gets interesting...

If the pilot was staying under the 1200' of the Bravo he would have smacked into the 1500' of SPG, UNLESS, he went East to go around and up into the 1500-3000 space on his way to... a towered airport.

Since OP said he wasn't talking to SPG, he should have been with the Bravo approach controller.

Does this make as much sense as anything else?
 
1RTK1 said:
This could be solved if developers quit building houses close to airports that have been there for decades , but that’s not going to happen. If you buy a house next to an airport, when disclosed, its on you, similar to farming and railroad tracks.
Click to expand...
Look at the chart. There are 4 towered and 2 non-towered airports within 10 miles of this guys house, and the area has been densely developed probably longer than we've been around.
 
Salty said:
Look at the chart. There are 4 towered and 2 non-towered airports within 10 miles of this guys house, and the area has been densely developed probably longer than we've been around.
Click to expand...

If the houses came before the airport, that’s a problem for the airport and what ever measures need be taken OK. If it’s the other way around...............
 
1RTK1 said:
If the houses came before the airport, that’s a problem for the airport and what ever measures need be taken OK. If it’s the other way around...............
Click to expand...
The houses probably were both before and after the airport, but most of them were built 40 or 50 years ago or more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top