RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Matters of general interest
User avatar
John Boucher
The Big Four K
The Big Four K
Posts: 4326
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:23 pm
Location: Dana Bay, Western Cape South Africa
Contact:

RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby John Boucher » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:33 am

RAASA statement to Recreational Pilots, supported by MISASA, SAGPA and EAA

Three Separate Microlight accidents in the first few weeks of 2012 – ALL INTO POWER LINES!!!

Five (5) Injuries – One (1) serious, Three (3) critical, One (1) Fatal!!

Every accident will be carefully investigated and claims or reasons given for the accidents verified, reports of this type of excessive low flying WILL also be investigated by the Enforcement Department!

It is an offence to fly below 500ft AGL away from a built-up area or over an open air assembly of persons, unless the flight can be conducted without being a nuisance or danger to person or property.

It is also an offence to fly over a built-up area with a NTCA aircraft, unless it is for the purposes of taking off and landing.

Any flight over a built-up area shall remain no less than 1000 ft above the highest point of such area.

Any repeated overflights of a built-up area shall remain no less than 3000 ft above the highest point of such area.

Flying into power lines/telephone lines is clearly flying lower than such minimums require, damaging power lines/telephone lines also constitutes a nuisance and danger to property, even possibly persons.

In view of these continued and reoccurring accidents further enforcement/legal action is being contemplated against any person not complying with the Civil Aviation Regulations.

Everyone is urged to report low flying or any other contravention of the Regulations. You could save a life! Reports can be made confidentially or by way of affidavit to either the SACAA or RAASA. Reports can be made by visiting the SACAA website at http://www.caa.co.za for the appropriate form, alternatively, to http://www.raasa.co.za.

These can also be e-mailed to RAASA on pierre@raasa.co.za Please assist us in improving flight safety!
Last edited by John Boucher on Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
John Boucher
MISASA Chairman 2023
jb.brokers@gmail.com
chairman@misasa.org
A Bushcat is Born - CH 211 C "Super Excited" :evil:
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:23 pm

AAANNNDDDDD there it is !!!!!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
RV9
DISH
User avatar
weedy
I hate bird strikes
I hate bird strikes
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 10:14 am
Location: BarraG

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby weedy » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:03 pm

John Boucher wrote:
Statement to Recreational Pilots - supported by MISASA, SAGPA and EAA.

Three Separate Microlight Accidents in the first few weeks of 2012 - ALL INTO POWER LINES

Five (5) Injuries – One(1) serious, Three(3) critical, One(1) Fatal.

Although every accident will be thoroughly investigated and the claims or reasons given for the accidents be verified, all reports or incident involving of low flying WILL be investigated.

Kindly take note of the fact that it is an offence to fly below 500ft AGL away from a build up area or an open air assembly of persons without being a nuisance or danger to persons or property. It is also an offence to fly over a built up area with a NTCA aircraft, unless for the purposes of taking off and landing, or Any flight over a built up area shall remain no less than 1000 ft above the highest point of such area, or Any repeated overflights of a built area shall remain no less than 3000 ft above the highest point of such area. Flying into power lines is clearly flying lower than such minimums require, damaging power lines also constitutes a nuisance and danger to property and persons. In view of these continued and reoccurring accidents further enforcement/legal action is being contemplated against any person not complying with the Civil Aviation Regulations.

All persons are urged to report low flying or any other contravention of the Regulations, you could save a life!. Reports can be made confidentially or by way of affidavit or CAHRS to either the SACAA or to RAASA. These will be investigated by the SACAA Enforcement department. Reports can be made by visiting the SACAA website at http://www.caa.co.za for the appropriate form, alternatively, to http://www.raasa.co.za. These can also be e-mailed to RAASA on pierre@raasa.co.za

Please assist us in improving flight safety!
My grammar is not the best, does it mean the same?

91.06.32 (1) Except when necessary for taking off, or landing, or except with prior written
approval of the Director, no aircraft –
(a) shall be flown over congested areas or over an open-air assembly of persons at a
height less than 1 000 feet above the highest obstacle, within a radius of 2 000 feet from
the aircraft;
(b) when flown elsewhere than specified in paragraph (a), shall be flown at a height less
than 500 feet above the ground or water, unless the flight can be made without hazard
or nuisance to persons or property on the ground or water and the pilot in command
operates at a height and in a manner that allows safe operation in the event of an
engine failure; and
(c) shall circle over or do repeated overflights over an open-air assembly of persons at a
height less than 3 000 feet above the surface
Claude
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:20 pm

No it doesnt - Your understanding is correct Weedy.

b) when flown elsewhere than specified in paragraph (a), shall be flown at a height less
than 500 feet above the ground or water, unless the flight can be made without hazard
or nuisance to persons or property on the ground or water and the pilot in command
operates at a height and in a manner that allows safe operation in the event of an
engine failure; and


I completely understand, sympathize and support the RAASA cause and the efforts that John is making to prevent further accidents like this. Im not sure I agree with the statement. I also believe that this will open a can of worms for false reports. Again, the argument of the pilots word against the "reporter" - this is going to cause cr@p lads. Some oke on the ground gets miffed because he believes a plane is too low and voila, one call to RAASA later, im on the carpet trying to defend myself against an ANONYMOUS report ??? BS !!! Report if you must but anyone has the right to face the "accuser" ??? Surely ???? Or are we now all going to run around reporting okes for low flying, albeit safely??

Again_ and again _ NOT ADVOCATING IRRESPONSIBLE, DANGEROUS LOW LEVEL FLYING... merely putting out out for debate
RV9
DISH
User avatar
weedy
I hate bird strikes
I hate bird strikes
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 10:14 am
Location: BarraG

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby weedy » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:54 pm

Dish if that's the case I'm sure it is an unintentional error, and is meant to be the same as the CARs.
Claude
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:56 pm

Im sure you are right weedy..
RV9
DISH
User avatar
jab2
Found a flight school
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:46 pm
Location: Hartenbos

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby jab2 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:22 pm

Dish wrote:I also believe that this will open a can of worms for false reports. Again, the argument of the pilots word against the "reporter" - this is going to cause cr@p lads. Some oke on the ground gets miffed because he believes a plane is too low and voila, one call to RAASA later, im on the carpet trying to defend myself against an ANONYMOUS report ??? BS !!! Report if you must but anyone has the right to face the "accuser" ??? Surely ???? Or are we now all going to run around reporting okes for low flying, albeit safely??
Dish, yes it will open a can of worms for false reporting, but view it from a different direction.

If a person take the trouble to complain about your flying, it means you ANNOYED him, no matter what your height, and he will stay annoyed until he finds closure. If there is no report procedure in the aviation community, the public will complain to people anti- or neutral to aviation, and decisions could be made without proper consultation with the aviation fraternity, and with results hurting aviation.

If there are complaints procedures within the aviation community, the we have a name and a face with whom to discuss the issue. Suitable people can then enter in discussion with the complainant and explain the issues around flying and nuisance. If it is for instance a hospital, church or old age home, some sort of agreement can be made to address the nuisance with an arrangement that suits everyone.
________________________________________
Cobus Brink
Hartenbos
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:27 pm

Sure, I think the operative words there are procedures !!! like You need to have my registration, date, time, allegation etc...
RV9
DISH
User avatar
D2O
Top Gun
Top Gun
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby D2O » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:29 pm

Dish wrote:No it doesnt - Your understanding is correct Weedy.

b) when flown elsewhere than specified in paragraph (a), shall be flown at a height less
than 500 feet above the ground or water, unless the flight can be made without hazard
or nuisance to persons or property on the ground or water and the pilot in command
operates at a height and in a manner that allows safe operation in the event of an
engine failure; and


I completely understand, sympathize and support the RAASA cause and the efforts that John is making to prevent further accidents like this. Im not sure I agree with the statement. I also believe that this will open a can of worms for false reports. Again, the argument of the pilots word against the "reporter" - this is going to cause cr@p lads. Some oke on the ground gets miffed because he believes a plane is too low and voila, one call to RAASA later, im on the carpet trying to defend myself against an ANONYMOUS report ??? BS !!! Report if you must but anyone has the right to face the "accuser" ??? Surely ???? Or are we now all going to run around reporting okes for low flying, albeit safely??

Again_ and again _ NOT ADVOCATING IRRESPONSIBLE, DANGEROUS LOW LEVEL FLYING... merely putting out out for debate
While I agree with your concerns, I think RAASA's stance is necessary at this point, given the fact that the status quo isn't working when you look at the amount of accidents and incidents occuring recently regarding hitting powerlines due to low flying. Maybe if I can suggest the following to prevent instances where you are reported as low flying, yet you know you were not:
I'm sure we all carry a GPS on board. Just make sure you have tracking on, and the GPS is capable of tracking altitude.
If RAASA or the CAA invite you for tea, make sure you have the track log to keep you in the clear.
It is impossible to determine a plane's altitude from the ground ( unless it can be given with reference to tree height, in which case the plane would have to be near and below tree level), so inaccurate reporting is bound to happen. Rather than fight against it, be prepared for it and log your flight with a GPS each time you fly.

Any which way you slice it, legislation is bound to change and get tougher on us unless we manage ourselves properly, and so far we haven't done a good job of it :cry:
Plane-less
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:45 pm

Well you see, therein lies a great question....

"given the fact that the status quo isn't working when you look at the amount of accidents and incidents occuring recently regarding hitting powerlines due to low flying. "

How do we know the staus quo isnt working? How many microlight flights have taken place since January 01 2012. How many safe, well planned and executed flights countrywide each day and each weekend?? Wanna even hazard a guess ??? 1000 + ??? I would have no idea but its a lot. Out of that there have been three okes who &^*^&%$#$ it up for everybody?? So I disagree, I think the status quo does work, and that the majority of the pilots I know are clever, disciplined and dilligent okes and are extremely capable pilots. Pilots who dont see the need to scribble themselves against powerlines in favour of impressing the goose they picked up at the pub last night and in doing so create a bad name for 10,000 other guys who fly within the rules and the limits.

I personally dont think that the entire sport needs to be governed as if we were kids. Take the okes responsible and hand out whatever punishment you see fit, but dont generalise that all pilots are idiots who are going to fly into powerlines. Thats tantamount to saying more road accidents after dark, so now no one gets to drive... after 8... Please man, were not 12.

NOW

Before I incur the wrath of the entire forum please understand i accept and agree that 1 Accident is 1 to many BUT, its not to say the system doesnt work andthe rest of us like naughty children have to be punished.

discliamer AGAIN - Again_ and again _ NOT ADVOCATING IRRESPONSIBLE, DANGEROUS LOW LEVEL FLYING... merely putting out out for debate
RV9
DISH
User avatar
D2O
Top Gun
Top Gun
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby D2O » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:12 pm

Dish, I do agree that it's only the few (probably less than 10) that spoil it for the rest of us, and I know I certainly don't want to be regulated to death and be treated like a kid, but unless the majority of us do something about those few who spoil it for us (i.e. regulate ourselves), then the CAA and RAASA will step in. We only have ourselves to blame if we do not report, or allow the reporting of low and dangerous flying. Even if it is a friend, you carry the burden of responsibility to ensure that person and the pax's safety, as well as the reputation of all microlights when you witness low and dangerous flying.

Whether it is reported anonymously or not is irrelevant, as confronting your accuser will only result in conflict and is counter productive. If you are called by the CAA or RAASA due to a complaint of low or nuisance flying, state your case by using the GPS log file. Let RAASA deal with the complainer if it's proven that your flight was not low, dangerous, or being a nuisance. We're doing this for fun, not to have arguments with people who complain. Just stick to the rules, and call out those who are not.
Plane-less
User avatar
KFA
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2789
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 8:09 pm
Location: Now at Petit (FARA)
Contact:

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby KFA » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:21 pm

Well you see, therein lies a great question....

"given the fact that the status quo isn't working when you look at the amount of accidents and incidents occuring recently regarding hitting powerlines due to low flying. "

How do we know the staus quo isnt working? How many microlight flights have taken place since January 01 2012. How many safe, well planned and executed flights countrywide each day and each weekend?? Wanna even hazard a guess ??? 1000 + ??? I would have no idea but its a lot. Out of that there have been three okes who &^*^&%$#$ it up for everybody?? So I disagree, I think the status quo does work, and that the majority of the pilots I know are clever, disciplined and dilligent okes and are extremely capable pilots. Pilots who dont see the need to scribble themselves against powerlines in favour of impressing the goose they picked up at the pub last night and in doing so create a bad name for 10,000 other guys who fly within the rules and the limits.

I personally dont think that the entire sport needs to be governed as if we were kids. Take the okes responsible and hand out whatever punishment you see fit, but dont generalise that all pilots are idiots who are going to fly into powerlines. Thats tantamount to saying more road accidents after dark, so now no one gets to drive... after 8... Please man, were not 12.

NOW

Before I incur the wrath of the entire forum please understand i accept and agree that 1 Accident is 1 to many BUT, its not to say the system doesnt work andthe rest of us like naughty children have to be punished.
(^^) Agree 100% with Dish. It's like the land issue Zuma raised. Claiming only 8% of land was transfered but bringing the Karoo and state owned land into their calculation.

I don't advocate low flying and I do not fly low in front of my students or when I have passangers but I do ocasionally fly low in areas I know well. I never fly low over unknown terrain. The whole reason I fly is to decide whether I want to be a satelite or if I want to be tree top height. The decision and the risk to fly low remains my own. Trying to police it will only make things worse. Education and training is the key issue here, not another law to restrict our flying.
Luck-The moment when preparation meets opportunity.
"Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you're right." -Henry Ford
"Opportunity Is Missed By Most Because It Is Dressed in Overalls and Looks Like Work." - Thomas Alva Edison
BUSHPILOTS FLY TAILDRAGGERS
Failure is not the opposite of success, it is the stepping stone for success
User avatar
Dish
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Johannesburg / North Riding / Panorama

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby Dish » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:25 pm

Yeah - were certainly on the same page D20.... listen I don't want to lose any of my mates or the okes on this forum... so sure lets self regulate and the offender can be issued a proper KLAP from his mates !!! The risk remains that some okes just fly by the seat of their pants and nothing we do, say or advocate will change that. Im sorry to keep eluding to the roads, but how many okes need to be shown pictures of cars/ people smashed and injured in drunken driving accidents yet..... they do it with monotonous regularity and find ways to justify it to themselves... and you / we are forever going to battle to change that
RV9
DISH
User avatar
D2O
Top Gun
Top Gun
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby D2O » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:33 pm

Dish wrote:Yeah - were certainly on the same page D20.... listen I don't want to lose any of my mates or the okes on this forum... so sure lets self regulate and the offender can be issued a proper KLAP from his mates !!! The risk remains that some okes just fly by the seat of their pants and nothing we do, say or advocate will change that. Im sorry to keep eluding to the roads, but how many okes need to be shown pictures of cars/ people smashed and injured in drunken driving accidents yet..... they do it with monotonous regularity and find ways to justify it to themselves... and you / we are forever going to battle to change that
Yep. Some people you just can't reach. As they say, every village has an idiot and it's no different when looking at motorists and pilots :lol:
Plane-less
wildthing
First solo
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:19 am
Location: Somewhere in the SKY or in Africa

Re: RAASA STATEMENT - LOW FLYING

Postby wildthing » Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:01 pm

Hi All.

Grammar notwithstanding, the message is meant to read that you may not fly below 500ft elsewhere (i.e. away from built up areas) unless the flight can be conducted without being a nuisance or hazard to persons or property (property can include domestic, farm or wild animals, or physical property, being a nuisance is relative, and I think that the intention is where a person is being deliberately spiteful by flying too low over ones house or prize horses, etc)

RAASA together with the various ARO’s i.e. MISASA, SAGPA etc, are not trying to start a witch hunt.
We are also aware that there are many reports of low or reckless flying as a result of personal grudges.

In order to successfully verify a low flight, one would have to use accurate measuring equipment, photographic evidence etc,
as it would be almost impossible to differentiate between 503ft AGL and 457ft AGL without these.

However, ending up in the power or telephone lines, it is reasonable to come to the conclusion that the plane might have been slightly below the 500 ft min.
If there are eyewitness reports from numerous sources saying that the aircraft was barely above roof top or tree top level over a built up area, we could also safely rule out 500ft give or take a 100ft error included.

The concern here is that there are too many occurrences of “low flying” and controlled flights into power lines lately, some that aren’t even reported.
Unless we as the pilots don’t step up to the plate and make it clear that we don’t support reckless and irresponsible flying, then you can bet on it that somebody will try and write more regulations which we don’t need.
What we do need is too get back to basics, good discipline, good airmanship, thorough preparation and flight planning and take pride in being a good pilot, not a dead hero.

Luckily most of the pilots that I know in our industry are safe and good pilots, but unfortunately there is always a small handful of cowboys that spoil this image for the rest.
By now it should be clear that we are here to support and grow our industry and sport, but not at the cost of safety and unnecessary deaths or injuries.

In the end we all carry a responsibility to keep aviation healthy and safe, I would rather have my buddy being pissed off at me for confronting him if he did something wrong, than standing around his grave and give his widow and children my condolences whilst knowing I could have perhaps done something to avoid this.
And I have been doing this too many times in the last few years.

Pierre

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests