Better to fly low than high in crowded airspace

[QDMQDMQDM]

Flying is always a balance of hazards and I reckon that in my cub pottering around the more congested parts of Britain I am much better off at 500 - 750 feet agl or so than up at 2 or 3,000 feet with all you other VFR bimblers. There's a lot less to bump into down there and for a slow STOL type like mine the risk doesn't seem that much higher. It's certainly a lot less stressful -- much less traffic, much less chance of wandering into controlled airspace etc.

Of course, I shouldn't post this here because everyone will start doing it!

QDM

[Genghis the Engineer]

I confess that if I'm flying a 50kn microlight, I do the same, also offers big advantages if battling a headwind.

But, it is often physically hard work (it's bumpy down there), and one shouldn't underestimate the extra workload of navigating at 500 ft, nor the importance of flying "field to field" at that sort of height since you have much less time to handle an engine failure if (gods forbid) one should occur - and one should always assume with a single engined aircraft that it might.

Can also make 2-way with ATC a bit erratic, which doesn't worry me unduly, but can disturb them sometimes.

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

And I thought it was only me......:O

SSD

[pulse1]

But I was always led to believe that you were more likely to be run down by something fast and pointy down there (or perhaps even slower with lots of nasty whirly things in the front or on top).

I met the Red Arrows down there once, just to the west of Bournemouth

[Genghis the Engineer]

Which is a good reason for using a FIS.

But, in general military low level traffic is below 250agl, so at QDM'2 500-750 feet you're reasonably secure.

Which doesn't get you off the hook so far as a decent lookout is concerned.

G

[Miserlou]

I used to trolley around europe VFR at 10,000'. Very little to bump into there either.

In a Cub, though, I'd always go for the max. 1000'. option, no radio.

[incubus]

But, in general military low level traffic is below 250agl,
Well it bloody well shouldn't be :) 250 is the minimum for most of the UK, with some special areas allowed down to 100' (I think that is lateral separation.)

Of course, MoD classes 0-2000' as low level and advises traffic to remain above that so they don't key skewered. They don't participate in FIS either, so London/Scottish info will generally be of little to no use to you.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Had two Apaches fly past my window today, both were I'd judge around 200-300ft.

G

[BillieBob]

IIRC the military consider helicopters and light fixed-wing aircraft to be low flying below 500ft msd while fast-jets and heavy fixed-wing aircraft are low flying when below 2000ft msd. The minimum level for low flying outside of specially surveyed areas is 250ft msd. Therefore, the most dangerous height band with reference to military fixed-wing low fliers is between 250-2000ft, as a number of pipeliners, aerial photographers, HEMS, etc. have found to their cost - sometimes terminally!

[Genghis the Engineer]

There's a bit of an issue here between perception and reality (and probably the rules, which are a third thing again).

I fly a great deal close to the BDN/Wallop CMATZ and RAF Odiham. All of my experience here is that you see very little mil traffic between 500ft and 2000ft. It's either low level and rotary, or climbs up to high level as quickly as it can, usually within the MATZ. This doesn't mean you don't see mil traffic in that bracket, but a great deal less than you see civil traffic.

On the other hand, I've flown myself also a reasonable amount around military low flying areas in various parts of the country. There whilst the military may well prefer to be VERY low level, terrain and operational necessity clearly doesn't allow that all the time. So, my opinion in such areas is that I climb and descend between SFC-2000ft in the overhead of a designated airfield, and spend the rest of my time above 2000ft or 500ft terrain separation whichever is the higher.

In the course of all this, I've seen a lot of military traffic, but yet to have any close encounters (well, there was that Lynx, but you can hardly blame me if some pongo decides to fly the wrong way down our downwind leg at circuit height).

G

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Sounds like a game for people with more money than me, ie people with their own aircraft. Those of us renting and subject to flying order books with conditions like "if forced down below 1000' other than when executing an authorised PFL a written report must be given to the CFI on landing" don't have that option.

[Genghis the Engineer]

It's the way to go :O

G

Who has flown 5 times in as many days at a cost of about £50 worth of fuel and a £4 part. Okay, if you want you can factor in another £15 for a weeks worth of insurance and hangerage on my £4k aeroplane - bought in 1997 and paid off years ago.

[FREDAcheck]

Notwithstanding other stuff in the air, Rule 5 etc, maybe it's courteous to those on the ground not to fly low. Even a Cessna is much more annoying over a quite garden at 500 feet than 1000 feet. So if you're not doing PFLs, site-seeing etc - better to fly above 1000 feet whenever possible? Anyway, that's my policy.

[Final 3 Greens]

All of my experience here is that you see very little mil traffic between 500ft and 2000ft
Therefore, the most dangerous height band with reference to military fixed-wing low fliers is between 250-2000ft, as a number of pipeliners, aerial photographers, HEMS, etc. have found to their cost - sometimes terminally! Now remind me, how big does a fast jet look, head on, at 1nm and how many secs does it take to travel 1nm?

Past experience does indeed suggests that a number of GA pilots have seen very little.

[2Donkeys]

Low =

greater risk of hitting something military

greater risk of hitting terrain or obstacle

greater risk of birdstrike

rougher air

poorer RT coverage

tougher navigation

runs counter to CAA and RAF advice

Is strongly discouraged in most other European countries

High =

You might hit somebody else if you are very very very unlucky



Seems like an easy decision to me.

My top tip would be to avoid what most people do when flying under an obvious piece of airspace such as the LTMA. If the limit is 2500-FLxxx, don't pootle along at 2400'. Doing that puts you at the same level as 90% of the rest of VFR traffic. Try 2200 instead, then you'll only risk hitting me. :D

2D

[charlie-india-mike]

and perhaps me


C-I-M

[PoorPongo]

Chaps,

At risk of teaching to suck eggs, here's my pitch/info:

Mil FW aircraft are limited to 250 AGL unless in specific areas. RW are not subject to that limitation and under certain circumstances can be down to GL. The reason that Genghis sees little between 500 - 2000 is probably to do with location. The areas around Odiham and Wallop are dedicated to use by the RW training establishments therein and so see little military FW traffic. I suspect that for anyone interested the UK Low Flying System details are available on the web. That would give you an idea whether you are operating in an area dedicated to RW trg or available for mil low flying generally.

As a mil RW pilot and very active FW PPL I avoid the 250 - 2000 band like the plague when flying either as it is the area most likely to come head to head with something fast and pointy. At work I tend to go below (more appropriate training), when I'm paying myself I go above (Height = time = options = survival)

Oh and as an aside I never, ever fly on a round number. Us pilots are tidy brained souls so pootling around at exactly 2000' on the regional seems like a likely way to find someone else similarly minded and reduce the percentages on the big sky / small aeroplane theory. Try 2170 or 1840 feet etc!!

PP

[ShyTorque]

2Donkeys,

"My top tip would be to avoid what most people do when flying under an obvious piece of airspace such as the LTMA. If the limit is 2500-FLxxx, don't pootle along at 2400'. Doing that puts you at the same level as 90% of the rest of VFR traffic. Try 2200 instead, then you'll only risk hitting me."

My own experience (transitting under the LTMA sometimes half a dozen times a day) has shown me that most VFR stuff doesn't actually fly at 2400ft; much of it seems to be a little lower, probably to ensure that a momentary inattention to S&L doesn't put them in the regulated airspace 100ft above.

My own top tip in this respect is NOT to directly overfly beacons such as the BNN, WCO or DTY. They attract aircraft who are using them whilst transitting VFR and so talking to no-one.