To the R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course

[Stan Switek]

11-17-2006 approx 1350 hours:

To the pilot of the yellow & red R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course &
the surrounding homes at 50 to 100' agl, what you did is in violation
of the FAR's & very unsafe. Your info has been forwarded to the FAA.

[Elzee36]

Stan Switek wrote:
> 11-17-2006 approx 1350 hours:
>
> To the pilot of the yellow & red R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course &
> the surrounding homes at 50 to 100' agl, what you did is in violation
> of the FAR's & very unsafe. Your info has been forwarded to the FAA.

You think he reads this NG?

[[email protected]]

On Nov 19, 2:46 am, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego <skiddz "AT" adelphia
"DOT" net> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:12:04 GMT, Stan Switek
>
> > wrote:
> >11-17-2006 approx 1350 hours:
>
> >To the pilot of the yellow & red R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course &
> >the surrounding homes at 50 to 100' agl, what you did is in violation
> >of the FAR's & very unsafe. Your info has been forwarded to the FAA.Damn, they saw me!!
>
> Where's Sea Cliff Golf Course again??

And what FAR's would that be?..I'm curious....

[Stan Switek]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:22:12 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
<skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:

>On 22 Nov 2006 09:08:14 -0800, wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>On Nov 19, 2:46 am, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego <skiddz "AT" adelphia
>>"DOT" net> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:12:04 GMT, Stan Switek
>>>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >11-17-2006 approx 1350 hours:
>>>
>>> >To the pilot of the yellow & red R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course &
>>> >the surrounding homes at 50 to 100' agl, what you did is in violation
>>> >of the FAR's & very unsafe. Your info has been forwarded to the FAA.Damn, they saw me!!
>>>
>>> Where's Sea Cliff Golf Course again??
>>
>>And what FAR's would that be?..I'm curious....
>
>91.119 - Minimum Safe Altitudes. Paragraph d in particular. It all
>comes down to whether or not the "...operation is conducted without
>hazard to persons or rpoperty on the surface."

Im going to go out on a limb here & guess 30 knots at 50' agl is no
beuno according to the HVC in the POH for the R-22. I'll also guess
the FAA frowns upon those who repeatedly fly 50' over the roofs of
houses & golf course club houses full of people for no purpose other
than showing off. Sounds like a violation of 91.13a Careless or
reckless operation to me.

[Linc]

Are they broadcasting a competition from that course, soon? They always
seem to show helicopter views of the hole being previewed. It gives a
great idea of the length, the lay, the position of the obstacles and
the position of the hole on the green in about 5-10 seconds, and it
always appears to be done from treetop level.

Linc

Stan Switek wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:22:12 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
> <skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:
>
> >On 22 Nov 2006 09:08:14 -0800, wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>On Nov 19, 2:46 am, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego <skiddz "AT" adelphia
> >>"DOT" net> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:12:04 GMT, Stan Switek
> >>>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >11-17-2006 approx 1350 hours:
> >>>
> >>> >To the pilot of the yellow & red R-22 buzzing Sea Cliff Golf Course &
> >>> >the surrounding homes at 50 to 100' agl, what you did is in violation
> >>> >of the FAR's & very unsafe. Your info has been forwarded to the FAA.Damn, they saw me!!
> >>>
> >>> Where's Sea Cliff Golf Course again??
> >>
> >>And what FAR's would that be?..I'm curious....
> >
> >91.119 - Minimum Safe Altitudes. Paragraph d in particular. It all
> >comes down to whether or not the "...operation is conducted without
> >hazard to persons or rpoperty on the surface."
>
> Im going to go out on a limb here & guess 30 knots at 50' agl is no
> beuno according to the HVC in the POH for the R-22. I'll also guess
> the FAA frowns upon those who repeatedly fly 50' over the roofs of
> houses & golf course club houses full of people for no purpose other
> than showing off. Sounds like a violation of 91.13a Careless or
> reckless operation to me.

[Stan Switek]

On 23 Nov 2006 05:59:55 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:

>Are they broadcasting a competition from that course, soon? They always
>seem to show helicopter views of the hole being previewed. It gives a
>great idea of the length, the lay, the position of the obstacles and
>the position of the hole on the green in about 5-10 seconds, and it
>always appears to be done from treetop level.
>
>Linc
No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
exempt from the FAR's.

[Stan Switek]

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:35:19 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
<skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:36:20 GMT, Stan Switek
> wrote:
>
>
>>No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
>>exempt from the FAR's.
>
>But you CAN get permission from the local FSDO for these types of
>operations as long as the folks at the FSDO feel you've taken proper
>safety precautions.

This was not the case & at any rate they are not going to permit
flying 50' over numerous houses.

[Stan Switek]

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:34:07 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
<skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 05:05:28 GMT, Stan Switek
> wrote:
>
>
>>Im going to go out on a limb here & guess 30 knots at 50' agl is no
>>beuno according to the HVC in the POH for the R-22.
>
>The HVC is really intended for takeoffs. If you're straight and level
>or descending inside the curve on the POH, and engine failure isn't as
>critical as if you were climbing or hovering in those areas. Still,
>not too smart to be that slow and that low unless you're making an
>approach to land.

I seem to remember it saying something to the effect "operation not
recommended within the shaded area. No mention of take off & landing.
I have seen a number of cases where pilots were violated for operating
in this manner. In the violation the FAA cited the HVC in the POH.

The bottom line is that this kind of flying gives the rest of us
undeserved attention.

[Linc]

Stan Switek wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2006 05:59:55 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:
>
> >Are they broadcasting a competition from that course, soon? They always
> >seem to show helicopter views of the hole being previewed. It gives a
> >great idea of the length, the lay, the position of the obstacles and
> >the position of the hole on the green in about 5-10 seconds, and it
> >always appears to be done from treetop level.
> >
> >Linc
> No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
> exempt from the FAR's.

If it was TV, then like Kevin said, I would've expected they would
discuss their plans with the FSDO to head off complaints. Of course, I
would also expect a notice by the course to the nearby homeowners.

Linc

[Biff Tannen]

On 24 Nov 2006 06:04:18 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:

>
>Stan Switek wrote:
>> On 23 Nov 2006 05:59:55 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:
>>
>> >Are they broadcasting a competition from that course, soon? They always
>> >seem to show helicopter views of the hole being previewed. It gives a
>> >great idea of the length, the lay, the position of the obstacles and
>> >the position of the hole on the green in about 5-10 seconds, and it
>> >always appears to be done from treetop level.
>> >
>> >Linc
>> No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
>> exempt from the FAR's.
>
>If it was TV, then like Kevin said, I would've expected they would
>discuss their plans with the FSDO to head off complaints. Of course, I
>would also expect a notice by the course to the nearby homeowners.
>
>Linc

Any of us that have flown over a golf course knows that most course
lay outs, for the purpose of TV fliming, would allow approaches &
departures along the fairways till a safe altitude is reached. I see
no need to fly over homes at low level. Doing so only invites trouble.

I know the course in question. The PGA, LPGA, Champions & Nationwide
Tours do not play there. It is a private course near the beach
surrounded by residential homes. Very expensive homes.

[B4RT]

Stan,

Dude, move on and get over it. Or maybe you can keep more baseballs that
the kids accidentally throw in your yard, and call the police on that Harley
with the open pipes.

;-)

Bart


"Stan Switek" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:35:19 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
> <skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:36:20 GMT, Stan Switek
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
>>>exempt from the FAR's.
>>
> This was not the case & at any rate they are not going to permit
> flying 50' over numerous houses.

[Biff Tannen]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 11:32:26 -0500, "B4RT" >
wrote:

>Stan,
>
>Dude, move on and get over it. Or maybe you can keep more baseballs that
>the kids accidentally throw in your yard, and call the police on that Harley
>with the open pipes.
>
>;-)
>
>Bart
>
Bart, Sounds like more of a public safety issue than keeping ball in
the yard or loue pipes.

[Biff Tannen]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:25:52 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
<skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote:

>On 24 Nov 2006 06:04:18 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:
>
>
>>If it was TV, then like Kevin said, I would've expected they would
>>discuss their plans with the FSDO to head off complaints. Of course, I
>>would also expect a notice by the course to the nearby homeowners.
>
>Even if the local FSDO gives it the ok and you send out notices,
>someone is gonna bitch.
>
>A couple years ago I arranged for a helicopter to land at my nephew's
>school. We got the FAA's permission, got the school to buy a
>liability insurance policy naming the helicopter operator as
>benificiary and sent out postcards to houses within 1/2 mile of the
>school. Not an hour after the helo landed, the complaints started
>rolling in from the people right next to the school.
>
>Like I said, someone will always bitch...

I think it's a question as to whether the person has a valid bitch.

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

Kevin: It is called "Recreational Bitching" It is an international
passtime.

--
Stuart Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" <skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net> wrote in
message ...
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:09:33 GMT, Biff Tannen >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>Like I said, someone will always bitch...
> >
> >I think it's a question as to whether the person has a valid bitch.
>
> Whether it's valid or not, some people will bitch for the sake of
> bitching.

[Linc]

Videographer filming for a video brochure for the golf course or a
gated community, then? Or photographer for the same?

Stan is probably correct in his assumption that it was a joyrider. I'm
just trying to determine if there could possibly be a legitimate reason
for the pilot to be doing that at all, and I have to wonder if Stan did
the same, or if he just saw something and immediately concluded the
pilot was totally wrong.

Linc

Biff Tannen wrote:
> On 24 Nov 2006 06:04:18 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:
>
> >
> >Stan Switek wrote:
> >> On 23 Nov 2006 05:59:55 -0800, "Linc" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Are they broadcasting a competition from that course, soon? They always
> >> >seem to show helicopter views of the hole being previewed. It gives a
> >> >great idea of the length, the lay, the position of the obstacles and
> >> >the position of the hole on the green in about 5-10 seconds, and it
> >> >always appears to be done from treetop level.
> >> >
> >> >Linc
> >> No.... This was buzz job plain & simple. But even it was, TV is not
> >> exempt from the FAR's.
> >
> >If it was TV, then like Kevin said, I would've expected they would
> >discuss their plans with the FSDO to head off complaints. Of course, I
> >would also expect a notice by the course to the nearby homeowners.
> >
> >Linc
>
> Any of us that have flown over a golf course knows that most course
> lay outs, for the purpose of TV fliming, would allow approaches &
> departures along the fairways till a safe altitude is reached. I see
> no need to fly over homes at low level. Doing so only invites trouble.
>
> I know the course in question. The PGA, LPGA, Champions & Nationwide
> Tours do not play there. It is a private course near the beach
> surrounded by residential homes. Very expensive homes.