Sandbar touch and go. Bad idea. But legal?

StevieTimes said:
Our Salty friend has a point. I believe most FAA regulations were written in blood.

How this could have ended up as an FAA regulation would have been like this. The plane blows the right main on the takeoff roll. The plane veers suddenly towards the nearby people. It's a near-miss, or hit and/or plane ends up in the water right next to them. Makes the Nightly News. Now the FAA gets involved, and to appease the public outcry, the new regulation is born.
Click to expand...

Say hi to Chicken Little while you're over there drinking beers. LOL.
 
You really think in today's climate we won't see more restrictions when more of these happen and are on film? Call me chicken little if it makes you feel better, but we'll see.
 
Salty said:
You really think in today's climate we won't see more restrictions when more of these happen and are on film? Call me chicken little if it makes you feel better, but we'll see.
Click to expand...

See first line of post 74.

No need to help the babies feel like their entitlement whining is in any way legitimate behavior for adults.
 
Palmpilot said:
Most GA accidents that involved people on the ground have not resulted in new regulations.

Also, can you post a screen shot of the nearby people during the takeoff roll? I can't find them in any of the three videos.
Click to expand...
denverpilot said:
Say hi to Chicken Little while you're over there drinking beers. LOL.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I think that this one is the damning evidence of the need for a new regulation, I was just finding merit in Salty's viewpoint.
 
Salty said:
This is how idiotic oppressive rules end up being created. If we don't think about others and just say "it's safe for me" we will end up having more laws passed that are stupid restrictive.

The fact is, the guy did not know who was on the beach, and what there situation was. There could have been disabled or elderly people. Those people did not agree to having someone land near them, and they had no option to avoid the situation. Bad judgement that may be perfectly legal, but still perfectly rude, thoughtless, and selfish.

I say this thread is hypocritical, because I can almost guarantee that the people saying it's perfectly fine would have issue with someone else doing something that they couldn't opt out of that you dislike or fear. Like guns, or horses, or motorcycles, or smoking, or whatever you personally have no interest in and find annoying or dangerous.
Click to expand...

So if I could summarize just so I understand:

You say to restrain from exercising our freedom, because laws could be passed that would restrict us from exercising our freedom...

Thanks but I'll pass.
 
tawood said:
So if I could summarize just so I understand:

You say to restrain from exercising our freedom, because laws could be passed that would restrict us from exercising our freedom...

Thanks but I'll pass.
Click to expand...
No. I say use common sense and pass on the touch and go when there are people close by.

But in a sense, yes, I am saying think about other people instead of selfishly doing what you want. Doing a touch and go on a sandbar where people are is not innocently minding your own business. You are effecting those other people, who had no option to avoid your activity.

When enough people do something that impact others negatively, then a law will be passed. And the law wont say "when nobody is around", it will be broader and restrict far more.
 
Salty said:
No. I say use common sense and pass on the touch and go when there are people close by.

But in a sense, yes, I am saying think about other people instead of selfishly doing what you want. Doing a touch and go on a sandbar where people are is not innocently minding your own business. You are effecting those other people, who had no option to avoid your activity.

When enough people do something that impact others negatively, then a law will be passed. And the law wont say "when nobody is around", it will be broader and restrict far more.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that there are no rules around this (yet). If I live next to an airport, or walk next to a runway, or walk next to a road with cars on it, I have acknowledged the risks, and have accepted them.

If I'm walking down the beach, maybe I'm completely risk-averse, and chose the beach over the sidewalk near the road to avoid danger (I'm REALLY risk-averse, let's just say). Now an airplane is landing "somewhat" next to me. I didn't accept that risk. As far as I know, the FAA has not defined any rules about how close a guy can land to a person on the surface, when not in an emergency.

That is the interesting part, that there is no FAA regulation about off-airport landings, regarding how close is too close to come to the general public/persons on the surface. We know how high to fly above them, in different population densities; but no rules about landing next to them (or close to them, or somewhat nearby, or however I can phrase this so people don't get their panties in a bunch about my nomenclature).
 
StevieTimes said:
It's interesting that there are no rules around this (yet). If I live next to an airport, or walk next to a runway, or walk next to a road with cars on it, I have acknowledged the risks, and have accepted them.

If I'm walking down the beach, maybe I'm completely risk-averse, and chose the beach over the sidewalk near the road to avoid danger (I'm REALLY risk-averse, let's just say). Now an airplane is landing "somewhat" next to me. I didn't accept that risk. As far as I know, the FAA has not defined any rules about how close a guy can land to a person on the surface, when not in an emergency.

That is the interesting part, that there is no FAA regulation about off-airport landings, regarding how close is too close to come to the general public/persons on the surface. We know how high to fly above them, in different population densities; but no rules about landing next to them (or close to them, or somewhat nearby, or however I can phrase this so people don't get their panties in a bunch about my nomenclature).
Click to expand...

One could extrapolate from air show regs. It's not completely true that there are "none".
 
denverpilot said:
One could extrapolate from air show regs. It's not completely true that there are "none".
Click to expand...
So what is the definition of landing "too close" to persons on the surface, when doing an off airport landing, according to the FAA?

If I have to scour through anything besides the FARs to figure it out, it seems like there is no regulation in place.
 
StevieTimes said:
So what is the definition of landing "too close" to persons on the surface, when doing an off airport landing, according to the FAA?

If I have to scour through anything besides the FARs to figure it out, it seems like there is no regulation in place.
Click to expand...

Also, don't forget to scour through the Chief Counsel opinions while you are at it.
 
denverpilot said:
One could extrapolate from air show regs. It's not completely true that there are "none".
Click to expand...

I also propose that if clear language existed, we would be quoting that as proof of the plane being "too close" or "not close at all".

Also; this wasn't an airshow.
 
StevieTimes said:
I also propose that if clear language existed, we would be quoting that as proof of the plane being "too close" or "not close at all".

Also; this wasn't an airshow.
Click to expand...

I never said it was. I said you're wrong that there's no written regs on the topic of how close aircraft can be to people on the ground.

If you're not willing to look them up, at least you'll know your assertion was flat wrong.
 
denverpilot said:
I never said it was. I said you're wrong that there's no written regs on the topic of how close aircraft can be to people on the ground.

If you're not willing to look them up, at least you'll know your assertion was flat wrong.
Click to expand...

There are no written regs, that I can find, that don't pertain to airshows, but just regular "off airport landings".

I did try to look them up, and found nothing.

I'm happy to be wrong by anyone who can quote the FAR to the contrary.

thanks
 
StevieTimes said:
There are no written regs, that I can find, that don't pertain to airshows, but just regular "off airport landings".

I did try to look them up, and found nothing.

I'm happy to be wrong by anyone who can quote the FAR to the contrary.

thanks
Click to expand...
Airshow performers get MSA waivers and acro waivers. Without them, the regular rules would apply. Landings (and takeoffs) are already excluded from MSA by statute.

There is nothing to be had that will discount that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top