What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

What is "buzzing?"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rick6a

Rick6a

Well Known Member
Many aircraft accident reports cite "buzzing" as a cause. It is a word often used, but I must confess I have trouble understanding what it actually means. What constitutes "buzzing?" Is it the newly minted pilot making a high speed pass over his girlfriend's rooftop and abruptly pulling up into an accelerated stall? Is it maneuvering at low altitude then colliding with an obstruction? Is it doing a high speed low pass down the runway and then losing control to wind shear or another meteorological event?

Is one airplane design more vulnerable to buzzing accidents than another?

Does anyone here personally know of someone killed while engaged in buzzing? What were the circumstances?

In short, I encourage comments that describe the typical circumstances, the classic and most common things that can lead an unwary pilot to kill himself while engaged in "buzzing."
 
Rick6a said:
Many aircraft accident reports cite "buzzing" as a cause. It is a word often used, but I must confess I have trouble understanding what it actually means. What constitutes "buzzing?" Is it the newly minted pilot making a high speed pass over his girlfriend's rooftop and abruptly pulling up into an accelerated stall? Is it maneuvering at low altitude then colliding with an obstruction? Is it doing a high speed low pass down the runway and then losing control to wind shear or another meteorological event?
Click to expand...

All of the above!
 
Rick6a said:
Does anyone here personally know of someone killed while engaged in buzzing? What were the circumstances?
Click to expand...

I watched a pilot do away with himself making a very high speed pass down the runway at Southwest Regional Fly-In many years ago. He was flying a T-18. The stabilator went into flutter and came off.
 
My competition in the ag business....

.....buzzed his brother who was driving the pilot's pickup truck home after spending a day working from a remote strip. His right wingtip connected the truck's roofline (at 130 MPH), right above the driver's head, breaking the back glass and his brother almost stuffed his shorts!

Back at the airport, the Agwagon's wingtip had shifted aft, wrinkling the rear spar attach area and rear spar. Needless to say, the airplane was grounded and the wing replaced during the next few days. Both were very lucky to be alive.

Best,
 
Rick6a said:
Does anyone here personally know of someone killed while engaged in buzzing? What were the circumstances?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, yes. Accidents I recall in my area:

1) Bystander on ground fatally struck by propeller of aircraft "buzzing".

2) Two fatalities when a C-150 Aerobat spun out of a very low level "buzz" and steep pull up.

3) One fatality (RV-8) due to midair collision following a "buzz" over the crowd at a flyin.

4) Another fatality when the RV-6 spun in at the top of a steep pull up following a low-level "buzz" over the runway (alcohol associated with this one...).

We have to wonder why it still happens. The "buzz kool aid" is strong stuff.....
 
Here's the FAA's Take on Buzzing

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters. Helicopters may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section if the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface. In addition, each person operating a helicopter shall comply with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the Administrator.

This is pretty straightforward. If you see someone who's outside of these parameters, call your local FSDO. Sooner or later, the idiot's going to do something that will have a negative impact on all of us.

Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
my $.02

Low flight and buzzing are two different things, in my opinion.

- Low flight is flying extended distances at an altitude at which the pilot is most proficient.
- Low flight requires intense concentration on the part of the pilot.
- Read and heed FAR 91.119 (distance from objects).
- Low flight should never be done over unfamiliar terrain.
- Low flying should only be done on calm weather days, and calm pilot days.
- Ease on down to the desired flight altitude.
- Practice. You're actually flying formation with the ground.

Buzzing, on the other hand, is repeatedly swooping down on an object or person followed by a steep pull up.

Ref 24 years of RVator, page 391 for other thoughts on the subject.
 
I thought buzzing involved "illegal substance, plant form". That being said, I remember when Fred who owned Western Air Research took a leisurely turn around his house in a Maule. A strut let go and he fell into his yard, dead. Buzzing is one of the most dangerous things I know of. Too bad its also fun.
 
bsacks05 said:
Here's a video illustrating a buzz job from a Spitfire.

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/weird_aviation_videos.htm

Scroll down to "Oh My God!" and click on that vid. Turn up the sound and hide the kids.....adult language.
Click to expand...

This particular "buzz" was done by the late Ray Hanna who owned the Old Flying Machine Company based at Duxford in England. Ray was a true professional and flew in many films, including Saving Private Ryan, where he and his son Mark flew the P-51s seen at the end of the film. This shot was set up I think by the BBC. Ray died a few years ago in his bed. Mark unfortunately was lost to us in 1999 when his Spanish built Bf109 caught fire during preperation for an air display near Barcelona.

Mark Hanna
 
What do you do?

Maybe we can take thread in another direction?
Ok......not Buzzing.....But.
What do you do when you fly over your house when your wife is home?
or What do you do when you fly over your buddy's house that is home and can't come to the airport to play?
Example, I got my home a handheld radio and keep it tuned to my local Air to Air frequency. When the wife hears a plane she turns on the radio and says hello. I stay at 1000 agl circling and say hi back!
again, What do you do?
 
One of the dictionary definitions of buzz as a verb is "fly low over"

To me buzzing is low level maneuvering flight performed in an unsafe or illegal manner.

Any extensive review of accidents will contain a significant number of instances of "low level maneuvering" as a contributory cause.
Buzzing is kind of like a dog. You know it when you see it.
 
Last edited:
definition........

if you get caught by the FAA then you were buzzing, careless and reckless!!!!!!!:(
 
Bob Martin said:
Example, I got my home a handheld radio and keep it tuned to my local Air to Air frequency. When the wife hears a plane she turns on the radio and says hello. I stay at 1000 agl circling and say hi back!
again, What do you do?
Click to expand...

That's what I plan on doing too.
Also, I can have her check to make sure the gear are down...she'd better say "yes"!
:eek:
 
Bob Martin said:
Example, I got my home a handheld radio and keep it tuned to my local Air to Air frequency. When the wife hears a plane she turns on the radio and says hello. I stay at 1000 agl circling and say hi back!
again, What do you do?
Click to expand...

I fly over my house..........a lot too! But instead of 1000', I prefer around 700' agl.

But then I'm on the base leg... :D

L.Adamson -- under the pattern
 
I have been buzzed countless times by the local spray planes, They get a kick out of it:). Most of them never make it up to 500 agl, they stay low to avoid other traffic. There is a lot of flight training in our rural area, coming out of the University of North Dakota. They never get lower than 500 agl, so it seems to work out ok for everyone.

A turbine spray plane passing over your head while you are sitting in a tractor will get your heart pumping.:D
 
I catch h**l all the time....

....from urban folks who move out to the country and find their 'peace' encroached on by us doing our work.

Neat story: One year I was defoliating cotton in late October and as I pulled up, noticed a camoflaged hunter running into the woods as I pulled up. I figured, ****, I'm gonna catch it now but a couple of hours later while I was watching the news, a knock on my front door had me up to answer. The most gorgeous blue-eyed blonde, around 5' 10" asked, "Are you Pierre Smith?" I said yes and she said "Thankyou, thankyou" as she wrapped her arms around me and left red lipstick on both sides of my neck ....whew!

Turns out that she and her husband were eating at my brother-in-law's fish house and she recalled the event in the cotton field to him. She said that they'd been there all week and never saw a deer until this crop-duster in a big yellow airplane flushed an 8 pointer and she got him. "If I could get my hands on him, I'd give him the biggest thankyou kiss he ever saw" To which my BIL replied. "Sho-nuff? Get in my truck" and he drove the 1/2 mile to my house and pointed to the front door...."Just knock". True story and one of the few times I didn't get cussed out:). It was their last day down here from Asheville, N.C. and they'd field-dressed the buck and on their way home.

Best,
 
Rick6a said:
Many aircraft accident reports cite "buzzing" as a cause. It is a word often used, but I must confess I have trouble understanding what it actually means. What constitutes "buzzing?"...
Click to expand...

So Rick, did you get your answer?

I was going to ask this exact same thing a month or so ago, but thought better of it. Figured it would turn into a multi-page thread filled with hyperbole and polarized opinion rather than a rational discussion about actual causes of crashes... I wish I had as much success predicting the lottery numbers. ;)
 
Toobuilder said:
So Rick, did you get your answer
Click to expand...
As this thread so graphically demonstrates, people can and do have different perceptions of what "buzzing" actually is.

Effectively satisfying my curiosity, I happily give credit to Milt Concannon in his post #16. With an economy of words, especially his last sentence, my perception of buzzing has now come into sharper, clearer focus.

Thanks Milt.
 
What ever FAA decides!!!!

A explanation to me 18 years ago was, more than 5 dwellings within 1 mile radius is considered "conjested" . Than since I was below 1000 feet, it was "reckless" what saved my butt was, I never denied being below 1000 feet , my record was clean, it was a practice area for student pilots from 2 different airports. My license was suspended for 20 days. Its the same with "fit for duty" if a pilot was drinking and can prove 8 hours between "bottle to throttle" the FAA can say you werent "fit for Duty" and then they will say you are "reckless".
 
67MK Larry said:
A explanation to me 18 years ago was, more than 5 dwellings within 1 mile radius is considered "conjested" . Than since I was below 1000 feet, it was "reckless" what saved my butt was, I never denied being below 1000 feet , my record was clean, it was a practice area for student pilots from 2 different airports. My license was suspended for 20 days. Its the same with "fit for duty" if a pilot was drinking and can prove 8 hours between "bottle to throttle" the FAA can say you werent "fit for Duty" and then they will say you are "reckless".
Click to expand...
Five dwellings in a 1 mile radius? Figures. But it's clearly the Feds game. This with some of our flying associates advocating that the FSDO be called every time someone believes they've seen someone violate an FAR, just makes it all that much more fun.
 
dissapointing

I just can't wrap my mind around a pilot turning in another pilot... :-/
Like the time an "impressed with himself" private pilot turned in a guy I knew, claiming he was buzzing. Turns out the guy was landing at a grass field, that the PP "genius" didn't even know existed... Still took months to straighten out. :-/
Or another PP who turned in a commuter airline crew for operating VFR into IFR conditions. He saw their "standby (off) transponder" squawking 1200 and figured he would be a hero.
Professional aviators don't run to the Feds and tell on each other. They meet privately and discuss it. Because, usually there's either been a mistake, or a teachable moment. Or both. Private pilots who don't get the whole "aviation community" thing, run others down, to make themselves look better. Either grow out of it, or go ahead and work at the FAA and stay on the outside forever...
my dos centavos

DM





Low Pass said:
Five dwellings in a 1 mile radius? Figures. But it's clearly the Feds game. This with some of our flying associates advocating that the FSDO be called every time someone believes they've seen someone violate an FAR, just makes it all that much more fun.
Click to expand...
 
I don't know, Rick...I think Terry nailed it with his post on the first page. The one thing beat into my head as a student pilot was that the FAA wrote rules for the safety of passengers or people on the ground. I kind of believe that they don't care much if you pancake yourself into the side of a mountain (as long as no one lives there). Maybe they'd mind having to climb up there to remove the wreckage...aside from that, I don't think it's a huge deal to them. Write a report about the accident pilot's death and call it good.

What I believe they DO care about is the black-and-white rules that Terry mentioned...all in the name of safety for passengers or people (and buildings/structures/vessels) on the ground. If you break the rules by violating the altitude restrictions, you're guilty. "Buzzing" is just a slang term for this particular offense, but I kind of think that it diminishes the danger of doing it. Buzzing sounds more fun than calling it something bad like "aerially assaulting" someone.

That aside, I'm betting there aren't many pilots that don't do it! ;)
 
Hope We Can Respectfully Agree to Disagree

If you stick your nose where it's not needed, you could cost someone a lot of money and or their job.
Fire away...
Dennis:
Yup. I have a problem with someone who thinks the rules don't apply to them. Especially if what they're doing may ultimately impact my ability to fly. As far as self-policing, I have some close experience in this area - please read you PMs.
Terry
 
PM received and responded to. I also have a problem with folks who think rules don't apply. I just think a better response it to teach them, not report them. We can continue via PM if you like.
DM

terrykohler said:
If you stick your nose where it's not needed, you could cost someone a lot of money and or their job.
Fire away...
Dennis:
Yup. I have a problem with someone who thinks the rules don't apply to them. Especially if what they're doing may ultimately impact my ability to fly. As far as self-policing, I have some close experience in this area - please read you PMs.
Terry
Click to expand...
 
lostpilot28 said:
I don't know, Rick...I think Terry nailed it with his post on the first page.... . "Buzzing" is just a slang term for this particular offense.......That aside, I'm betting there aren't many pilots that don't do it! ;)
Click to expand...
Fair enough Sonny. I hear you. But here's the conundrum as I see it. We've all seen videos of RV's doing low altitude high speed passes. Some of those maneuvers have been executed by known, even very well known members of our community. Someone had to be standing nearby with a camera to capture the event and oftentimes you KNOW that handheld camera on the ground was closer than 500'. If we were to strictly and unequivocally adhere to Terry's measure, then yes, these pilots may be guilty of "buzzing." But are they really? Heck NO. Not in my book. Are they being unsafe? Huge, huge gray area here. I still go with Milt's take in post #16. "Buzzing is kind of like a dog. You know it when you see it."
 
Last edited:
Rick6a said:
Does anyone here personally know of someone killed while engaged in buzzing? What were the circumstances?
Click to expand...

A few years ago I met an RV-3 pilot who talked about how he liked to buzz antelope in Wyoming, along with other assorted tricks. The gist of the conversation was that "RVs sure are fun", but I also couldn't help but feel that maybe this person did not possess the best of judgement.

Sure enough, couple of years later he made a high-speed pass over a runway and took the wings off in a hard pull-up at the end. According to the NTSB report the plane had never received the spar modification per Van's SB, even though the pilot (who was not the builder) had been informed about it. A somewhat surprising aspect of this was that the pilot was also an engineering professor at the local university, and certainly not stupid. Impossible to know what he was thinking however.

Please be careful...
 
Rick6a said:
... But here's the conundrum as I see it. We've all seen videos of RV's doing low altitude high speed passes..."
Click to expand...

Indeed. And I can tell you that at the private airpark that I call home, this is a daily occurrence... a tradition, almost. What better way is there to verify the runway is clear and the windsock is working than a 200 MPH pass down the runway at 5 feet AGL? ;) In my mind this is not buzzing. To me, buzzing happens when you come so close to someone that they dive for cover in a ditch or you force another vehicle to take evasive action... That's buzzing. Hitting trees, flutter, or accelerated stall/spin are completely separate and unrelated events in my mind. I also think there is a difference between low flying and buzzing, with the latter being the more dangerous.

Perhaps one person's "low" is another's "buzz"?

In the end, the discussion is moot... The Feds will violate any of us at any time if they wish.
 
Toobuilder said:
Indeed. And I can tell you that at the private airpark that I call home, this is a daily occurrence... a tradition, almost. What better way is there to verify the runway is clear and the windsock is working than a 200 MPH pass down the runway at 5 feet AGL? ;) In my mind this is not buzzing. To me, buzzing happens when you come so close to someone that they dive for cover in a ditch or you force another vehicle to take evasive action... That's buzzing. Hitting trees, flutter, or accelerated stall/spin are completely separate and unrelated events in my mind. I also think there is a difference between low flying and buzzing, with the latter being the more dangerous.

Perhaps one person's "low" is another's "buzz"?

In the end, the discussion is moot... The Feds will violate any of us at any time if they wish.
Click to expand...

thank you, that is just how I see it as well.
I would also like to add, the noise factor also feeds into the fear factor for the person being buzzed.
 
Last edited:
slyfox said:
thank you, that is just how I see it as well.
I would also like to add, the noise factor also feeds into the fear factor for the person being buzzed.
Click to expand...

Nothing beats a P-51 Mustang from about 30' away. Actually a bit more. 30' horz. & 30' above. Buzz job -- maybe, worth it --- certainly!

L.Adamson -- RV6A
 
The addition...

Toobuilder said:
...Would there have been a better outcome if he pulled the wings off at 2500 feet?
Click to expand...

...of a ground based audience can make pilots do things that they would not do otherwise.

The last words on the radio before a Turbine Legend fatally crashed on takeoff at our Airpark were "watch this"....:(
 
Toobuilder said:
...Would there have been a better outcome if he pulled the wings off at 2500 feet?
Click to expand...

Actually there might have been; NTSB says he was wearing a parachute. Debatable of course whether he could have actually used it at 2500' (or any other altitude). I'm not trying to make any comment on whether making low passes in general is a good idea or if it constitutes buzzing. Lots of people manage to do it safely. This one didn't.
 
az_gila said:
...of a ground based audience can make pilots do things that they would not do otherwise.

The last words on the radio before a Turbine Legend fatally crashed on takeoff at our Airpark were "watch this"....:(
Click to expand...

I agree.

...And "watch this" are the most deadly words in aviation... One of the reasons I NEVER say it on the radio. I'm pretty sure there is a direct link to speaking those words and the possibility of an accident.;)
 
It takes training

Low level flying like formation flying is something that should not be attempted without training. Military pilots are taught how to fly at low lever mainly due to a war time mission that requires this type of flying. Low levels are a type of flying that I truly enjoy and can be accomplished safely in my opinion. 300-500 feet is safe comfortable altitude once trained, in the military you are taught to fly to 500' or your comfort level, some days that may be higher than 500'. I think in the GA world, a well planned low level route away from congested areas can be fun and safe.

There is a lot to learn to be a safe low flying pilot, there are illusions which can reach up and bite you, but formation flying is becoming more popular, but that is a skill to be learned and not just attempted on the fly. The same is true of low level flying. They both come with risks, but the risk can be mitigated with training.
 
Rick6a said:
Fair enough Sonny. I hear you. But here's the conundrum as I see it. We've all seen videos of RV's doing low altitude high speed passes. Some of those maneuvers have been executed by known, even very well known members of our community. Someone had to be standing nearby with a camera to capture the event and oftentimes you KNOW that handheld camera on the ground was closer than 500'. If we were to strictly and unequivocally adhere to Terry's measure, then yes, these pilots may be guilty of "buzzing." But are they really? Heck NO. Not in my book. Are they being unsafe? Huge, huge gray area here. I still go with Milt's take in post #16. "Buzzing is kind of like a dog. You know it when you see it."
Click to expand...

You make a great point, Rick...I suppose if I think about it more, I come to the realization that the FAA's rules are very conservative. Much like the fact that I break the speed limit EVERY time I drive (really, who doesn't), the black-and-white rules that the FAA sets for altitude clearances aren't really unsafe.

Thinking on what you said a little more leads me to believe that buzzing is partially subjective. So, with that, I'm going to say that crossing the line is going to depend on the situation. A few years back when I lived in California I read about some guy buzzing (as in, closer than 20 feet by what the media reported) people on a beach. :eek:

I suppose none of my blathering brings any clarity to your question...but it's great to think about, anyway! ;)
 
Speed is life!

slyfox said:
Low level flying is a learned thing. One of the LEarned things is depth perception, this is totally learned. You don't just start doing it. Another thing you need to learn is bird watching. I took a guy out flying a couple weeks ago and I was picking out birds all over the place. His response was, how do you do that. He never saw a single bird, and when I pointed one out he still didn't see it. Than what to do when you come up on one. Believe it, I actually bank the plane and pull up slightly on the elevator so the bird will hit on the bottom if it does, and yes that does work.

Oh another thing, when flying low you slow down. Slowing down helps for menuevering. The faster you go, the higher the g forces, also the longer it takes to make the turn. All this stuff is taught in mountain flying, great stuff.[/QUOTE]


I think I have to disagree here. I must caveat that I have never taken a mountain flying school, just a career flying fighter in the Air Force and Navy. I have also done mountain checkouts with various military Aero clubs, but no formal mountain school.

One thing some pilots do is think in only two dimensions, remember there is a vertical component to aviation. what you said above is true if I want to make a turn in the horizontal plane only, lower speed will reduce the radius of turn and also increase the rate of turn to a point, too slow and the rate will decrease. If you carry extra speed you then can use some of the vertical to make just as tight a turn across the ground, the extra speed also gives you the added benefit of time if you lose the engine, you can trade the extra speed for some altitude giving you more time to find a spot to land or get the motor going again. I for one would not be flying low and slow!

Cheers
Click to expand...
 
RVG8tor said:
[I think I have to disagree here. I must caveat that I have never taken a mountain flying school, just a career flying fighter in the Air Force and Navy. I have also done mountain checkouts with various military Aero clubs, but no formal mountain school.

One thing some pilots do is think in only two dimensions, remember there is a vertical component to aviation. what you said above is true if I want to make a turn in the horizontal plane only, lower speed will reduce the radius of turn and also increase the rate of turn to a point, too slow and the rate will decrease. If you carry extra speed you then can use some of the vertical to make just as tight a turn across the ground, the extra speed also gives you the added benefit of time if you lose the engine, you can trade the extra speed for some altitude giving you more time to find a spot to land or get the motor going again. I for one would not be flying low and slow!
Click to expand...

Problem is..................most mountain flyers who really have to turn around in a short radius haven't got any extra airspeed left. The mountain is already outclimbing them as it is!

I too, fly in a lot of rugged mountain area & have taken the mountain courses. The RV certainly has an advantage in regards to density altitude, rate of climb, and airspeed over the average Cessna 172 or worse. But then of course, a military F-16 is much better all around! :D\

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
can we try a mental experiment??

Rick6a said:
"Buzzing is kind of like a dog. You know it when you see it."
Click to expand...

Two pilots; Lucky and Joe. Both fictional.

Lucky flies three days a week and is extremely proficient in his plane with thousands of hours in lots of different conditions. He can tell just by control feel and seat of pants just how far he is from critical aoa, completely masters slow flight and can land the thing in a tennis court. But he is also proficient on instruments and very safety-conscious, though he doesn't worry too much about regs and likes to give some very skillful buzz jobs which, while spectacular, never take the plane anywhere near uncontolled flight and he always has a workable plan for a power failure even when buzzing.

Joe's not quite _that_ proficient in his Cherokee but he is also real careful about safety and can fly confidently and to the standards. But he prefers to fliy just by the book with no "extra" excitement needed.

Both men are in good health and coincidentally go to the same doc for their medicals, who had no qualms about either, even thought he knows perfectly well that any one of us can keel over with no notice.

So now comes a bad day and by some tragic cosmic coincidence both pilots simultaneousy experience severe annurisms and are istantly incapacitated. Joe was enroute solo IFR at the time and they found the wreckage in a wooded area after a brief search. Lucky was in the middle of one of his picture-perfect buzz jobs.

So here's the experiment part. How do the NTSB reports read? Oh, and the media reports?
 
RVG8tor said:
I think I have to disagree here. I must caveat that I have never taken a mountain flying school, just a career flying fighter in the Air Force and Navy. I have also done mountain checkouts with various military Aero clubs, but no formal mountain school.

One thing some pilots do is think in only two dimensions, remember there is a vertical component to aviation. what you said above is true if I want to make a turn in the horizontal plane only, lower speed will reduce the radius of turn and also increase the rate of turn to a point, too slow and the rate will decrease. If you carry extra speed you then can use some of the vertical to make just as tight a turn across the ground, the extra speed also gives you the added benefit of time if you lose the engine, you can trade the extra speed for some altitude giving you more time to find a spot to land or get the motor going again. I for one would not be flying low and slow!

Cheers
Click to expand...

Mike, this is a time when each situation is unique. Often times, the reason for a turnaround is because the ceiling up a particular route is too low to maintain adequate clearance, and a level turn must be made to escape. In this case it is very advantageous to be slow for a minimum radius turn. The rising terrain, as previously mentioned, is another example where extra airspeed on a piston single may not in itself be enough to clear the obstacle. Of course, we're talking pretty specific situations here; low weather ops and canyon ops, but it goes to show how much caution and planning are required when flying low. With all the ceiling and maneuvering space in the world, I'm right with you in wanting as much energy as possible down low.
 
RVG8tor said:
slyfox said:
Low level flying is a learned thing. One of the LEarned things is depth perception, this is totally learned. You don't just start doing it. Another thing you need to learn is bird watching. I took a guy out flying a couple weeks ago and I was picking out birds all over the place. His response was, how do you do that. He never saw a single bird, and when I pointed one out he still didn't see it. Than what to do when you come up on one. Believe it, I actually bank the plane and pull up slightly on the elevator so the bird will hit on the bottom if it does, and yes that does work.

Oh another thing, when flying low you slow down. Slowing down helps for menuevering. The faster you go, the higher the g forces, also the longer it takes to make the turn. All this stuff is taught in mountain flying, great stuff.[/QUOTE]


I think I have to disagree here. I must caveat that I have never taken a mountain flying school, just a career flying fighter in the Air Force and Navy. I have also done mountain checkouts with various military Aero clubs, but no formal mountain school.

One thing some pilots do is think in only two dimensions, remember there is a vertical component to aviation. what you said above is true if I want to make a turn in the horizontal plane only, lower speed will reduce the radius of turn and also increase the rate of turn to a point, too slow and the rate will decrease. If you carry extra speed you then can use some of the vertical to make just as tight a turn across the ground, the extra speed also gives you the added benefit of time if you lose the engine, you can trade the extra speed for some altitude giving you more time to find a spot to land or get the motor going again. I for one would not be flying low and slow!

Cheers
Click to expand...

going fast at low altitude will get you in trouble. Meaning, you have a longer turning radius. If flying through mountains, I mean below the peaks. I call this trench running. What speed is best, I was told best glide speed. Possisioning yourself in the trenches, you need to be within 100ft of the side of the mountain. Might as well be 100ft off the ground on a flat surface. How do you turn around if stuck in a bowl. How bout a hammer head wing over, very affective. If there is room, you just turn around and fly back out. Being at best glide speed will save your live in these condition, oh and don't forget the g factor. Now, something you need to remember, if you turn around, make sure you add some good power in the turn to maintain airspeed. I'm not the guy that flys 3 times a week either, sorry to say I get to fly every day. My skills are very good.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
slyfox said:
going fast at low altitude will get you in trouble. Meaning, you have a longer turning radius. If flying through mountains, I mean below the peaks. I call this trench running. What speed is best, I was told best glide speed. Possisioning yourself in the trenches, you need to be within 100ft of the side of the mountain. Might as well be 100ft off the ground on a flat surface. How do you turn around if stuck in a bowl. How bout a hammer head wing over, very affective. If there is room, you just turn around and fly back out. Being at best glide speed will save your live in these condition, oh and don't forget the g factor. Now, something you need to remember, if you turn around, make sure you add some good power in the turn to maintain airspeed. I'm not the guy that flys 3 times a week either, sorry to say I get to fly every day. My skills are very good.
Click to expand...

So, you are advocating an aerobatic maneuver close to the ground, in order to get out of a situation which should not have occurred if sensible flying procedures were taken? Not only that but you are saying the entry speed for this hammerhead/stall turn should be best glide speed.

It does not matter how good you think your flying skills are, in my opinion, this is a very effective way of using your aircraft to make a hole in the ground.
 
I deleted all my post, mainly because I think things went way off base. Second when flying into the mountains you need a bag of tricks for if you get stuck in a bowl. If you can't stumach a hammerhead to get you out of a bad situation, that's where you either plow into a side of the mountain or do a quick turn around back out, than stay out of the mountains. I did my training in the mountains with pilots that have countless hours, not reading it in a book. Flying in the mountains is serious stuff, if you can't do it, stay out.
 
slyfox said:
I deleted all my post, mainly because I think things went way off base. Second when flying into the mountains you need a bag of tricks for if you get stuck in a bowl. If you can't stumach a hammerhead to get you out of a bad situation, that's where you either plow into a side of the mountain or do a quick turn around back out, than stay out of the mountains. I did my training in the mountains with pilots that have countless hours, not reading it in a book. Flying in the mountains is serious stuff, if you can't do it, stay out.
Click to expand...

For many pilots who have actually got stuck in a bowl, they've already got to the point to where the airplane just can't out climb the terrain ahead. Just banking one way or another for a turn makes the situation worse, as they loose what little lift they've got left. More than not, they just start a rotation into the trees. There is a video on the Internet that was filmed during such a sequence. Only the "video" survived. In a case such as this, any maneuver that requires pulling vertical would be impossible, as a stall would be immediate. In situations such as these, you have to realize the possible outcomes, and do something before it's too late.

There are even cases of high density altitudes in which the pilot takes off with descending terrain, but can't climb out of ground effect. In one case, the pilot had to slowly use the rudder just to avoid some trees. He had no extra lift to use the ailerons to bank. If he did, the plane would just settle. After what seems like forever, the aircraft finally gains enough airspeed to climb.

P.S. ---Fighting density altitudes bug me. I was once in a situation where it took forever to get out of ground effect. It was a Cessna 172 with three people. I know others, and have seen the result of other airplanes, who never escaped past the bounds of ground effect. This is why I much appreciate the better climbing abilities of the RV's. An F-16/F-18 would still be better though...

L.Adamson --- RV6A
 
Last edited:
slyfox said:
...... Second when flying into the mountains you need a bag of tricks for if you get stuck in a bowl. If you can't stumach a hammerhead to get you out of a bad situation, that's where you either plow into a side of the mountain or do a quick turn around back out, than stay out of the mountains. I did my training in the mountains with pilots that have countless hours, not reading it in a book. Flying in the mountains is serious stuff, if you can't do it, stay out.
Click to expand...
A piece aired on "60 Minutes" last night that graphically demonstrated what went wrong when a Blackwater operated twin engine aircraft filled with passengers tried to climb out of a box canyon high in the mountains of Afghanistan. Much of the footage was taken from the cockpit perspective of an aircraft mimicking the flight path of the accident airplane:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6228919n&tag=related;photovideo

If you had viewed that footage, as a pilot you would have likely questioned why any inexperienced pilot would point the aircraft in the direction he impulsively chose...apparently a spur of the moment decision by a pilot brand new to the Afghan operating environment and drawn to explore the mountain tops. Captured by the cockpit voice recorder, he openly *hoped* he could clear the tallest peak. Given no real exit option existed once steered and well into that direction of flight, with the airplane flirting with a stall and the ground rushing up rapidly, no perfectly executed hammerhead or any other "trick" would have saved the many lives lost that day. Because the crew did not file a flight plan and chose an unconventional, off-the-beaten flight path, finding the wreckage was unnecessarily delayed until it was too late to help anybody. This accident appears to be a clear example of poor judgment and its potentially deadly consequences.
 
Last edited:
Safe low level flying

My post dealt with SAFE low level flying, and my opinion is that you want good speed to handle the unexpected engine failure. Safe low level flying means flying into known terrain and in good weather. Flying into unknown terrain or terrain that out limits the performance of your airplane is not safe. Also flying in mountainous terrain with low ceilings and or high winds is a recipe for disaster.

Planning a route on a nice clear calm day is safe and enjoyable, note I said planned, this means looking at a chart to study the terrain and obstacles that may become a factor. You must always have an out, if you do run into weather, you turn back you don't keep going hoping that it will clear up.

I stand by my assumption that with training and planning low lever flight is safe, but no risk free, but what flying is risk free.
 
+1
Agree w/Nemo

RVG8tor said:
My post dealt with SAFE low level flying, and my opinion is that you want good speed to handle the unexpected engine failure. Safe low level flying means flying into known terrain and in good weather. Flying into unknown terrain or terrain that out limits the performance of your airplane is not safe. Also flying in mountainous terrain with low ceilings and or high winds is a recipe for disaster.

Planning a route on a nice clear calm day is safe and enjoyable, note I said planned, this means looking at a chart to study the terrain and obstacles that may become a factor. You must always have an out, if you do run into weather, you turn back you don't keep going hoping that it will clear up.

I stand by my assumption that with training and planning low lever flight is safe, but no risk free, but what flying is risk free.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top