Experimental Aircraft over Sporting Events

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by Hawg Driver

This isn't just a RV issue, either. This is affecting every type of experimental aircraft, including many warbirds. A good friend of mine had to leave a very well-paying NASCAR flyby on the table because the local FSDO wouldn't him approval to fly his jet warbirds over a race, quoting this issue exactly.

Seems like this includes a totally different issue.... Compensation for a flight in an experimental aircraft that likely has operating limitations that specifically prohibit it (unless he has a LODA authorizing a deviation from his operating limitations).

[Kahuna]

Originally Posted by F1R

I suspect that even if team Aero Dynamix switched to C 172's and called themselves the Chicken Hawks, they would not be doing stadium flights for long. The issue at hand is somebody does not want AC flying over stadiums.

Well testing this theory a bit. I know of no certified planes that have been issued an investigation letter for flyovers. No certified planes doing flyovers, and there are many, have been called by the FAA to stand down that Im aware of and I have spoke to some of these pilots.
So far, only experimentals have been issued LOI's for these flyovers. In a flight of combined experimentals and certified, ONLY the experimentals got letters.

I have no way of knowing if any certified planes have been the subject of any investigations. I only know that I know of none and I have been poking on this issue for quite some time.

[Stu McCurdy]

Certified, in this case Bonanzas, are being approved with no repercussions. This from an FFI Bonanza pilot:

"For the record:

DHS, TSA and FAA approved the TFR waiver for our recent Beechnutz overflight of KU stadium, as they did twice earlier this fall.

The overflight was conducted at 1000' above the highest obstacle within 2000' laterally.

Flyover airspeed and altitude, combined with the close proximity of farm fields to the north combined to meet the emergency landing requirement in case of power plant failure.

Certified aircraft do not seem to be in the crosshairs of this witch hunt like Experimental aircraft, but we'll proceed cautiously before we commit to any stadium flyovers next year. "

Originally Posted by Kahuna

Well testing this theory a bit. I know of no certified planes that have been issued an investigation letter for flyovers. No certified planes doing flyovers, and there are many, have been called by the FAA to stand down that Im aware of and I have spoke to some of these pilots.
So far, only experimentals have been issued LOI's for these flyovers. In a flight of combined experimentals and certified, ONLY the experimentals got letters.

I have no way of knowing if any certified planes have been the subject of any investigations. I only know that I know of none and I have been poking on this issue for quite some time.

[Stu McCurdy]

As previously stated, the various YouTube videos of Large Formation Flyovers has been getting FAA attention. Because of the TFR approval through TSA, FAA felt they were loosing airspace control. (They are now in the approval loop after TSA has their cut.) FAA was worried about untrained, unknown, uncarded, "non-professional" formation groups conducting the flyovers. To regain control, they used Part 91, 319(c) to issue the LOIs.

EAA, ICAS, and FFI are involved in discussions with FAA to help resolve the situation. It will be time consuming, but hopefully we will have a solution so flyovers can resume.

[N53LW]

A Stadium defined bt the FAA and Sean Elliott is an "Open Air assembly of people" Not a DPA !!

Originally Posted by Rocket Rick

Recently, the VP of the EAA Advocacy and Safety Office, Sean Elliott, and his staff met with the FAA in DC to discuss the issue of flights over densely populated areas (DPA). Everyone involved agreed to continue the solution that has worked for years. (Note: I'm only addressing Experimental - Amateur Built (E-AB) aircraft.)

The FAR's state flight over DPA by experimental aircraft are prohibited. However, the FAA has never defined 'densely populated' and frankly, we prefer they don't. FAA Order 8130 allows for E-AB aircraft to fly pretty much unimpeded in the national airspace system and we want to keep it that way.

The field inspectors operate based on the Policy Orders that FAA headquarters issues. The Policy, in this case Order 8130.xx currently does not, and will not in the next update, specifically address or prohibit flight over DPA for E-AB aircraft. Thus no action regarding flights over DPA should be taken by an inspector. However, any flights (formations included) over various venues, such as stadiums, attractions etc., are expressly prohibited.

Last week, the EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council and the EAA Staff met for our fall meeting in Oshkosh. The subject of supporting flight activities over these venues were discussed at length. We all agreed that EAA cannot support this and thereby place the entire E-AB community at risk. (However, there are specific procedures that allow for some exceptions in these types of airspace, such as at Oshkosh.)

I hope this brief report of the issue is helpful and should dispel any rumor or inuendo that may be floating around. If things were to change, I have every confidence that the EAA Staff will be on top of the issue and fighting to uphold our rights. So let's enjoy our aircraft and go fly!

Rick Weiss
Chairman, EAA Homebuilt Aircraft Council
Member, EAA Board of Directors

[jrs14855]

Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002

Seems like this includes a totally different issue.... Compensation for a flight in an experimental aircraft that likely has operating limitations that specifically prohibit it (unless he has a LODA authorizing a deviation from his operating limitations).

Compensation for certain flights in Experimental Aircraft dates to at least the period immediately after WWII.
The vast majority of aircraft used for airshows and many used for air racing since that time have been Experimental Exhibition and Experimental Air Racing certificated aircraft. This predates the EAB rules by several years and predates EAA by about seven years.
Examples form the late 40's early 50's are the Pitts S1's flown by Phil Quigley, Betty Skelton and Caro Bayley. All flew airshows for compensation.
The Cole Brothers Stearman's were modified aircraft that were no longer certified standard category.

[BobTurner]

Originally Posted by jrs14855

Compensation for certain flights in Experimental Aircraft dates to at least the period immediately after WWII.
The vast majority of aircraft used for airshows and many used for air racing since that time have been Experimental Exhibition and Experimental Air Racing certificated aircraft. This predates the EAB rules by several years and predates EAA by about seven years.
Examples form the late 40's early 50's are the Pitts S1's flown by Phil Quigley, Betty Skelton and Caro Bayley. All flew airshows for compensation.
The Cole Brothers Stearman's were modified aircraft that were no longer certified standard category.

I think a close look at your operating limitations will say "passengers or property" may not be carried for compensation. You may pay a cfi to instruct you in your plane, you may hire a ferry pilot to fly your plane with no passengers, etc.

[Joness0154]

Originally Posted by F1R

I suspect that even if team Aero Dynamix switched to C 172's and called themselves the Chicken Hawks, they would not be doing stadium flights for long. The issue at hand is somebody does not want AC flying over stadiums. I suspect that the majority of people who pay to go to a ball game, might be a touch uncomfortable with 3 to 30 airplanes in close formation over 30,000 spectators. (I think they might go to an air show to see airplanes)
It was GREAT fun while it lasted! The military only did it for recruitment. http://youtu.be/lzFucqDElyE?t=39s
Oshkosh will be fine... nobody goes there unless they want to see airplanes.

At every Bears game I go to the entire crowd goes off the walls nuts when there is a flyover. People love them. From my experiences, people who don't like them would be in a tiny minority.

[NovaBandit]

Originally Posted by F1R

I stand corrected. The spectators look like they are enjoying the RV's!
http://youtu.be/Z_DPWJy4xcU?t=35s

Those people were quite obviously screaming in fear for their lives. The high fives at the end were most likely because they were thrilled that they had survived this brush with death.

[N941WR]

So, you are an FAA manager. Sunday afternoon you get your beer, wings, and chips all arranged. You turn on your TV to watch your favorite football team. Before the game a bunch of amateurs fly over the stadium in airplanes of questionable airworthyness. One small mistake and 10, 20, 30 or more of these flying beer cans could fall into the stadium, killing dozens of fans. If that happens, our NFL crazed FAA manager would lose his job and pension.

What do you are think he is going to do? Let that happen?

If they were able to stop Bob Hoover, then Team Aerodynamics and the other groups are easy prey.