Absolute lowest altitude you can fly (legally)

"Michael" wrote : Mxsmanic is not a troll.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
"A Lieberma" wrote: ONLY IN YOUR OPINION WHICH IS CLEARLY THE MINORITY.
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Allen, just kick Michael, and anyone else who so strongly sides with Mx,
right into the kill file with MX. They deserve each other.

At any rate, you won't have your time killed reading their garbage, or time
killed skipping over it. They simply dissappear. That is a "good thing,"
in my book.

Also, delete any cross posting; post only to the piloting group. I think a
lot of kooks are coming over here from the sim group.

Hang in there everyone; perhaps the tide is turning.
--
Jim in NC

On 1/5/2007 10:40:30 PM, "Morgans" wrote:

Also, delete any cross posting; post only to the piloting group. I think a
lot of kooks are coming over here from the sim group.

Careful there, Jim. It's one thing to fight the good fight against this one
individual. However, it's a completely different and somewhat classless act
to label those from the sim group as "kooks."

I have interacted with many in both groups and I can say with certainty that
those in the sim group are a very friendly, smart, and respectful bunch. In
fact, you obviously are not aware that many of those in the sim group have
been regulars in this group for years, if you can believe it.

--
Peter

writes:

Knots are not dimensionless in aviation. A knot is one nautical
mile per hour, and that nautical mile is the distance corresponding to
one minute of latitude at the equator.

Yes, but that is largely incidental today, particularly for east-west
movements away from the equator. Anyone using that relationship for
dead reckoning, for example, can get into trouble if he's not very
careful.

Anyone using lat/long and some spherical trig (like the old guys
who crossed oceans used sextants to determine their position) will
make use of these things.

I don't think too many pilots use sextants today. I think an
increasing number of pilots don't know how to do anything except look
at a moving map display, or set an autopilot.

The lazy ones
among us (or like me, the ones really poor at math) will use GPS, which
does the same thing.

Yes. But what you don't use, you lose. And I don't think pilots are
taught how to use sextants, anyway. Although I've heard that early
airline navigators and pilots used them--which is why some older
aircraft have little windows above the pilots, for shooting the stars.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

The quickest and easiest answer is:

You learn to ignore it or go insane.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:33:00 -0600, "Lee K. Gleason"
wrote:


"Duncan (NZ)" wrote in message
.nz...
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 16:08:40 +1300, Duncan (NZ) wrote:

In article ,
says...
What regulations determine the absolute lowest altitude you can fly
above the ground in the U.S.? I understand that the area just above
the ground is usually Class G outside airports, and it only goes up
to
700 or 1200 feet most of the time ... which implies that you can
actually fly at 500 feet AGL if you want. But is there some other
regulation that prohibits aircraft from flying this low, in general
or
in certain conditions/areas?

Well... in New Zealand it's 500' - unless you're in an approved low
level (training) area, in which case it's as low a your intructor
dares.

Over populated areas it's 1,000'

All AGL.

So the instructor who took me down to 100ft over 70? mile beach,
whilst on vacation was just having fun?!!!!!

- did you see your instructor switch the transponder to standby?

My instructor told me I should be careful and never fly low enough to let
anyone read the tail number of the plane...

When thy are this size (check logging trail or corn field)
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/833R/833R_frame.htm
ground reference maneuvers would be difficult. :-))
But in that light, a few years back we had some neighbors to the south
(the typical new subdivision with expensive homes that thought the
airport was too noisy and should be closed so they could sleep
better/later)

At any rate I'd not had the Deb for more than a couple of months. It
had a 2-blade prop. If you've ever heard a Bonanza with a 2-blade prop
take off you know they are loud. If you've not hear one...The prop
tips go supersonic at take off RPM and they are LOUD.

It was a hot day with a gusty wind pretty much out of the south so we
all had to use the short runway which meant I could count the boards
in their picnic tables. I have no doubt that the dishes rattled in
their cupboards and they had to stop talking as a number of us went
over. Of course if they hadn't made such a stink about lenthening
18/36 it would have been 4000 feet and most of us would have been at
pattern altitude over their homes instead of a couple hundred feet.

As I said, the airport was busy and most were either high performance
singles or twins. I only made three trips that day. None were
circuits, or pattern work. However the one irate home owner wrote
down my N# and complained. The airport manager said "this guy says
you went over his house every five minutes all afternoon and he knows
it was you because he wrote down the N number. I explained I'd made
three trips and even doing circuits I'd not be able to do one every
five minutes.

In a way it was good he blamed me with the impossible because the
complaint was filed with the notation, Not possible. Every plane
sounded the same to him and he saw my N# so I got credit for all. Had
he been a bit more observant and accurate they might have listened to
him about the noise, but at that point the city saw him more as a
troublemaker.

BTW I now have a 3-blad prop on the Deb.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

schrieb:

Knots are not dimensionless in aviation. A knot is one nautical
mile per hour, and that nautical mile is the distance corresponding to
one minute of latitude at the equator.

Of course. And how often do you fly along the equator?

BTW, meters were defined the same: 10'000km equal one quarter of the
equator. Along with this definition came a system of decimal degrees,
one full cycle equal 400deg (i.e. one quarter of a cycle 100deg, which
corresponded to the meter definition). While the metric system was a
success, the decimal degrees system never made it, for better or for
worse. (Personally, I think for better. Basic calculations would be much
easier if evolution had created man with 6 fingers on each hand.)

Stefan

Stefan schrieb:

BTW, meters were defined the same: 10'000km equal one quarter of the
equator.

Correction. Definition was the distance from the pole to the equator.
The result is about the same.

Wolfgang Schwanke writes:

No they do not.

Yes, they do. Read the regulations (Réglementation de la Circulation
Aérienne).

It's not a big issue in
practice, but statments like the above are tinted by national prejudice
and should not be tolerated.

I know, in Germany everything is prohibited, except that which is
allowed. And intolerance cannot be tolerated, unless its intolerance
to intolerance, which is tolerated. Or put more simply, whoever is in
charge censors whoever isn't.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Wolfgang Schwanke writes:

You mean you don't know.

No, I do know. I read the regulations. You apparently did not.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit%C3%A9_en_aviation
(For those non-fluent in French: It says that pilots use feet, nautical
miles, inHg, ft/min and knots)

Wikipedia isn't the document that contains the regulations. See

http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv....re_1=2&lang=fr

When criticised for bigotry, you answer with more bigotry.

No, I just find it amusing to point out that the people who complain
the most about "bigotry" are often its most devoted practitioners.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic schrieb:

Wikipedia isn't the document that contains the regulations. See

http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv....xteregle/texte

And what exactly in this reglementation is not ICAO conform?