Jonathan Goodish wrote:
In article ,
Jim Logajan wrote:

Owen Hiller wrote:
I had no idea that a flyover of the runway was illegal.

I presume this may be due to 91.119, which would probably require at
least 500 feet AGL if there is no intent to land?


Except that's not an accurate paraphrase of 91.119.

True. My intent was merely to provide a summary line for 91.119, not
provide any sort of paraphrase. I should have written "I presume this may
be due to 91.119, which addresses minimum legal altitudes?"

I don't pretend to know whether runway flyovers are illegal, which is why I
framed the speculation as a question.