Field inspection and Rule 5....

[Finals19]

So here's the scenario...
There's a private strip on the outskirts of the village I live in. At work last night (in vicinity of village) I noticed a C152 flying low and slow (est 300' agl) possibly config'd for landing. I can only assume that he was intending to land at the private strip. I haven't seent this strip, but understand its quite short (say under 500m)

Now, I would very much like to go and look at this strip next time I fly (from a licenced field not too far from London) If I got permission from the strip owner for a field inspection with a possible intent to land (depending on what it looks like) then am I correct in understanding I would not be in contravention of rule 5? (The a/c is a C172, so less than 500m could be a bit marginal depending on surface, slope, obstacles etc) The local terrain is approx 250 feet amsl, so otherwise I would have to stick to 750ft on regional QNH. In all probability I would just set up for an approach and throw it away at the 250' stage, making sure of course that I turned away from the built up areas.

[FlyingForFun]

Finals,

First of all, the general rules about low flying and unlicensed strips:

Because this field is not a government or a licensed airfield, you must comply with all of the low flying rules except for the 500' rule, from which you are exempt any time you are making an approach at any airfield whether licensed or not.

This means that you must comply with the following rules:

- Failure of a power unit - you must be able to make a safe emergency landing if a power unit fails.

- The 1000' rule over a congested area

- The land clear rule over a congested area (in addition to the failure of a power unit rule)

- The 1000' rule over an assembly of 1000 people. (Note that there is also a specific prohibition on taking off or landing within 1000m of such an assembly, except an an aerodrome in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA).

In practice, since the field you are talking about is already in use as a private strip, it's probably a reasonable assumption that it's quite possible to make an approach whilst complying with all these rules, since other users of the strip do so regularly - but of course that doesn't exempt you from ensuring that you do comply with them.


Now, the bit about your possibly not landing at the field.

In order to make an approach, you will require an exemption from the 500' rule. Rule 6a(ii) states that:6. The exemptions from the low flying prohibitions are as follows—

(a) Landing and taking off
(ii) Any aircraft shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when landing and taking-off in accordance with normal aviation practice or air-taxiing.
So what you need to decide is whether what you are suggesting is "normal aviation practice". If you think it is, then go for it. If not, then you must not break the 500' rule.

Hope that helps!

FFF
-----------------

[scubawasp]

hint hint:)

[1d2d3d4d]

So if you check it out for a precautionary landing and throw it away after a 50' pass, deciding the surface is rough, waterlogged or otherwise not suitable. In accordance with normal aviation practice is that OK?

Chris

[scubawasp]

ofcourse, if the field is unsuitable after inspection, whats the problem?? Kill yourself? aslong as you really needed to land there....

[BackPacker]

I have actually read an interpretation (from the CAA) somewhere that if there's any doubt about the conditions of the field, that it is perfectly legal (wrt. rule 5) to inspect the field by overflying it on subsequently lower levels, even below 500', as long as you intend to land there after your inspection finds out the field is OK.

So don't do a mock approach to land and throw it away at 50', overflying the field on the centerline, just to have a good story in case you get busted for rule 5, but do a proper (precautionary landing-type) approach right of centerline (assuming you're in the LHS), then remain at 50' to inspect the field. If the inspection is allright, land on the next pass.

On an unknown, unmanned, unlicensed, grass field, with no recent pilot reports, I would say that this is normal aviation practice.

[Finals19]

Thanks for the info guys. The fundamental issue is indeed that I have no idea about the strip until I can get low enough to have a good look at it and see if its OK to actually land. I am in agreement with others on here - do a precautionary inspection, adhering to the rules (but obviously below 500') and if it doesn't look good, then simply go around and not bother. Short of driving out there and doing a walking visual inspection of the field, I have no other choice. The field is just outside a village, so its fairly remote and clear of built up areas. As long as I contact the owner first, I see no problem then.

:ok:

[niknak]

Rule 5 and the low flying rules do not apply to "take off and landing".

[BEagle]

If there are no 'persons, vehicles, vessels or structures' within 500 ft, you can go down to within one molecule of the strip quite legally!

Teaching 'precautionary landings' requires a 50 ft a.g.l. surface check before commencing the final circuit, for example.

[shortstripper]

If I were going to fly into a strip that close to home, I'd go and walk it first. Whilst everything said is valid, if you take the mickey and do a several low passes, upsetting people, the CAA might ask why you hadn't just nipped over on foot as well :suspect:

SS

[Them thar hills]

SS's reply makes most sense.
A few low runs for whatever reason, valid or not , may be enough to upset public relations. Private strips should always be taken as PPR with a briefing from the owner re the conditions on the day, unless perhaps its an old- established strip.
The "I should be able to get in there" phrase may make it all sound like an adventure, but isn't any help to the strip owner after the dust has settled. :hmm:

[Zulu Alpha]

There was a case a few years ago when the CAA prosecuted someone who said they were doing this.
The CAA view was that he had been buzzing the strip (Stoke by Nayland I think).
There was a footpath at one end and a passing walker complained.
Not sure how one decides between the two, but I suspect that most of us don't land at full throttle.
So your examination should be performed like an approach to land and go around, not a full power flypast.

Do ask for PPR as the owner may have difficult locals or a planning issue and even a fly around above 500ft can cause problems.