How low is too low?
Thread Starter
How low is too low?
"Hypothetically" you've been given a job to check / patrol a high-pressure gas pipeline that say runs from Longford to Melbourne over a distance of around say hypothetically 120 nautical miles.
You have a low-level endorsement and appropriate approvals to operate below 500ft agl. I assume you are checking for:
- People constructing on the pipeline
- People digging drains / holes
- New vegetation
- Gaping big holes caused by a leak
The aircraft of choice is a C206.
What altitude would you think would be appropriate for such an operation?
Is 150ft just ridiculous?
Even with approvals for low flying, does one have the right to fly that low? If I have horses or goats in my paddock is the operator liable?
You have a low-level endorsement and appropriate approvals to operate below 500ft agl. I assume you are checking for:
- People constructing on the pipeline
- People digging drains / holes
- New vegetation
- Gaping big holes caused by a leak
The aircraft of choice is a C206.
What altitude would you think would be appropriate for such an operation?
Is 150ft just ridiculous?
Even with approvals for low flying, does one have the right to fly that low? If I have horses or goats in my paddock is the operator liable?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NZ
Age: 44
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never had a low level endo. but would assume the letter of the law says you can go 0ft if so possible. HOWEVER I also would say that without having to look the rules up that there would be a clause saying 'as low as required without jeopordising the saftey of the aircraft or property.
As a licence holder you would be expected to use your judgement as a fit and proper person so determine wheather or not you are too low. If you hit something you will prove your judgement is not that of a fit and proper person and risk your licence as a result, even at 499ft and above.
In NZ there is no endo for low flying you just need 'reasonable cause' to do so......... ie SAR, top dressings, surveying etc. That said I dont think a judge would buy your 'just cause' for buzzing your mates on the beach and again you will be hung out accordingly.
As a licence holder you would be expected to use your judgement as a fit and proper person so determine wheather or not you are too low. If you hit something you will prove your judgement is not that of a fit and proper person and risk your licence as a result, even at 499ft and above.
In NZ there is no endo for low flying you just need 'reasonable cause' to do so......... ie SAR, top dressings, surveying etc. That said I dont think a judge would buy your 'just cause' for buzzing your mates on the beach and again you will be hung out accordingly.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low flying
Hey there!
For what it's worth, lol, my opinion is this.
I'm a photography pilot, and as mentioned, in NZ there's really no limit so long as you have a bona-fide reason to be low. As i was (am still am!) a newbie in the whole scheme of things, i only flew as low as i felt comfortable doing.
As i got more time in the aircraft and the circumstances, i felt more comfortable going lower so we do - not to be hoons, but to get better pictures.
My boss was happy with this and worked around my skills ie we started work on flat areas while i got used to the height and all the illusions that go with it, then as the experience grew we moved to hilly and more populated areas.
Having said all that, we've never had the need to be any lower than 150-200 ft AGL unless we're working round terrain.
(Still not sure that the people underneath me are safe but ... i AM a girl pilot, ha ha
)
Not sure if this helps but just thort i'd put my 2 cents in...
Kiwi chick
For what it's worth, lol, my opinion is this.
I'm a photography pilot, and as mentioned, in NZ there's really no limit so long as you have a bona-fide reason to be low. As i was (am still am!) a newbie in the whole scheme of things, i only flew as low as i felt comfortable doing.
As i got more time in the aircraft and the circumstances, i felt more comfortable going lower so we do - not to be hoons, but to get better pictures.
My boss was happy with this and worked around my skills ie we started work on flat areas while i got used to the height and all the illusions that go with it, then as the experience grew we moved to hilly and more populated areas.
Having said all that, we've never had the need to be any lower than 150-200 ft AGL unless we're working round terrain.
(Still not sure that the people underneath me are safe but ... i AM a girl pilot, ha ha
)Not sure if this helps but just thort i'd put my 2 cents in...
Kiwi chick
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 52
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many years ago a mob in Brisbane started aerial surveys of the states power lines (large HV lines not your suburban street) and this proved extremely cost effective and reliable. Think they now operate in a few states.
Different a/c type though......one with a rotating wing so they can have a really good look if need be.
Dare say their ops are below 200ft but not much below that.
ENERGEX do broadcast in the media warning when they are doing ops in your area and to secure livestock (how I dont know
)
Also the RAAF do some low level stuff .......and I believe a feedlot full of cattle do make interesting viewing when startled by an F111 at 200 ft!
SQ
Different a/c type though......one with a rotating wing so they can have a really good look if need be.
Dare say their ops are below 200ft but not much below that.
ENERGEX do broadcast in the media warning when they are doing ops in your area and to secure livestock (how I dont know
)Also the RAAF do some low level stuff .......and I believe a feedlot full of cattle do make interesting viewing when startled by an F111 at 200 ft!
SQ
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Is 150ft just ridiculous?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melb
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HH wrote:
If you knew who was asking the question you would know this is not too far fram the truth!! 
Quote:
Is 150ft just ridiculous?
You'll get a nosebleed if you fly that high!
Is 150ft just ridiculous?
You'll get a nosebleed if you fly that high!
Squawk
A couple of eons ago I started up the inspection program on the ADL MMB line. As part of the insurance/maintenance on the line we were required to do it on a monthly basis, and also after any of the many crossed creeks started running. In addition to the things you mention, we also checked closure of the many gates, and places where the line had started to float up out of the ground after rain.
We used to run that with a 210 normally. Optimum height was about 200 feet. Below that, your field of view is moving too quickly. You can see all you need from 200.
Have also done it in a 310 and a 402 but visibility is not as good and ground speed a bit higher, so not as effective.
Maui
A couple of eons ago I started up the inspection program on the ADL MMB line. As part of the insurance/maintenance on the line we were required to do it on a monthly basis, and also after any of the many crossed creeks started running. In addition to the things you mention, we also checked closure of the many gates, and places where the line had started to float up out of the ground after rain.
We used to run that with a 210 normally. Optimum height was about 200 feet. Below that, your field of view is moving too quickly. You can see all you need from 200.
Have also done it in a 310 and a 402 but visibility is not as good and ground speed a bit higher, so not as effective.
Maui
Thread Starter
Thanks Maui, quite useful.
"If you knew who was asking the question you would know this is not too far from the truth!!"
Pause - is that a dig at me?
"If you knew who was asking the question you would know this is not too far from the truth!!"
Pause - is that a dig at me?
Yes, 200 AGL is probably your best bet. At 300 AGL you'll frighten less stock, and the view is still good enough.
CASA were unhappy with our teaching low level below 200, (as per CAO 29.10), and I guess they haven't changed from that.
happy days,
CASA were unhappy with our teaching low level below 200, (as per CAO 29.10), and I guess they haven't changed from that.
happy days,
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
200ft is more than adequate, any lower and you are starting to find yourself sharing airspace with powerlines.
Check your companies CAR 157 exemption ( should be in your ops manual ) for minimum heights, if they do not have an exemption again CAR 157, you can not do this flight below 500ft/1000ft.
Check your companies CAR 157 exemption ( should be in your ops manual ) for minimum heights, if they do not have an exemption again CAR 157, you can not do this flight below 500ft/1000ft.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
power lines
We always did a survey of the area above 500' first to see where they were.
The first few runs of the area we started high and worked down lower and lower each time. Also, we established a minium safe altitude to clear any obsticles in the area, if you got lost or forgot where in the paddock you where, you'd climb to that hight and figure it out.
Low level is great flying... but you gotta be safe when you do it!
The first few runs of the area we started high and worked down lower and lower each time. Also, we established a minium safe altitude to clear any obsticles in the area, if you got lost or forgot where in the paddock you where, you'd climb to that hight and figure it out.
Low level is great flying... but you gotta be safe when you do it!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
150' is a pretty handy height for that type of work.
From the perspective of 17 years of dedicated professional low level ops, including, mustering, power line survey, Ag and Geo survey, never ever below the standard wire height till you've PRE checked the intended flight path. Twice for beginers!
Unless your feelin' lucky
Re. the stock, hurt the stock, you buy the stock, and maybe their next couple of generations, that's the otherway graziers make money.
M
From the perspective of 17 years of dedicated professional low level ops, including, mustering, power line survey, Ag and Geo survey, never ever below the standard wire height till you've PRE checked the intended flight path. Twice for beginers!
Unless your feelin' lucky
Re. the stock, hurt the stock, you buy the stock, and maybe their next couple of generations, that's the otherway graziers make money.
M
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: low and heavy
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is one rule that hasn't been mentioned yet.
If you intend to fly within 100metres horizontally and 350ft vertically of someones place of residence, including caravans, shacks etc.... you need written position if possible, otherwise verbal, but some position must be obtained.
And believe me there are plenty of people out there that have nothing better to do than get your rego and complain to CASA.
I would of thought 250ft would be plenty low enough until you find something wrong that needs further investigation. Then you can do your obstacle searches before descending. If your hyperthetical pipe is in Victoria, keep a keen eye out for the wind measuring towers out there that are popping up all over the place. They are measureing wind conditions to see if a wind farm in the area is viable, and they can be very difficult to detect.
take care
If you intend to fly within 100metres horizontally and 350ft vertically of someones place of residence, including caravans, shacks etc.... you need written position if possible, otherwise verbal, but some position must be obtained.
And believe me there are plenty of people out there that have nothing better to do than get your rego and complain to CASA.
I would of thought 250ft would be plenty low enough until you find something wrong that needs further investigation. Then you can do your obstacle searches before descending. If your hyperthetical pipe is in Victoria, keep a keen eye out for the wind measuring towers out there that are popping up all over the place. They are measureing wind conditions to see if a wind farm in the area is viable, and they can be very difficult to detect.
take care
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point Plucka, and on VHF a few weeks ago I listened to the pilot of a Dornier Search and Rescue aircraft on a training flight obtain just such permission from a Ships Captain.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low Flying
I was once a passenger on a ship where exactly that occured. The PA announced that military aircraft would over fly the ship, and it certainly did happen shortly after. Not right over the ship but alongside at low level.
I did 1500 hours of low level flying, mostly out in the middle of nowhere looking for minerals. I did a flight test with CASA (or DCA, DOT, CAA or whatever it was called that week), got my approval which I had to renew each year for some reason. It was just an exception to the 500ft minimum rule.
That started a long period of nomadic existance, from Tasmania to Cape York, to Geraldton and most places in between. An american geololist wanted me to fly "low and slow" navigating to within 200 meters of a track visually. No GPS then. Later it got to 100 meters. (yes it can be done) Out in the flat country (which most of it is) navigating was number one priority, but in the hills it was necessary to look far ahead and make sure I never got the aeroplane in a situation that it could not climb out of. (I got some interesting lessons from an ag pilot and we changed to a Fletcher aircraft) At least there are no power lines in most of the places I went. Mostly it was boring but also interesting, and you had to be alert to head off the next "moment of terror" so it does not happen. Six or seven hour continuous flights were normal.
It was hard work, but I enjoyed it, and I got plenty of work as I developed skills that most other pilots did not have, or know about. There was a surplus of pilots then too.
I did 1500 hours of low level flying, mostly out in the middle of nowhere looking for minerals. I did a flight test with CASA (or DCA, DOT, CAA or whatever it was called that week), got my approval which I had to renew each year for some reason. It was just an exception to the 500ft minimum rule.
That started a long period of nomadic existance, from Tasmania to Cape York, to Geraldton and most places in between. An american geololist wanted me to fly "low and slow" navigating to within 200 meters of a track visually. No GPS then. Later it got to 100 meters. (yes it can be done) Out in the flat country (which most of it is) navigating was number one priority, but in the hills it was necessary to look far ahead and make sure I never got the aeroplane in a situation that it could not climb out of. (I got some interesting lessons from an ag pilot and we changed to a Fletcher aircraft) At least there are no power lines in most of the places I went. Mostly it was boring but also interesting, and you had to be alert to head off the next "moment of terror" so it does not happen. Six or seven hour continuous flights were normal.
It was hard work, but I enjoyed it, and I got plenty of work as I developed skills that most other pilots did not have, or know about. There was a surplus of pilots then too.
Last edited by bushy; 13th Jun 2007 at 04:34.