Now that's low level!! Shouldn't CASA have a look at this one?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Out tha back
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that's low level!! Shouldn't CASA have a look at this one?
Over in the other forums, noticed this link.
about 28 seconds in, look out the window, how low? Then check out the expression on the grooms face!! It's well below 500 feet!
How is it that these people are still allowed to fly?
https://youtu.be/nSJnwnNYoIM
about 28 seconds in, look out the window, how low? Then check out the expression on the grooms face!! It's well below 500 feet!
How is it that these people are still allowed to fly?
https://youtu.be/nSJnwnNYoIM
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't look that bad. VFR down a canyon.. What's wrong with that, just because you see the hills to the side you don't know the altitude below them at that point, as well we can't be sure of the sequence of editing. The approach could have been inserted anywhere in the sequence.
How is it that these people are still allowed to fly?
Do you really think the regulator should be involved? Please tell me your kidding. Otherwise find a vocation elswhere.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure how you can claim it was illegal? You can judge height from an oblique angle on someone's camcorder out the window and you can't even see the ground BELOW the aircraft, where it could be easily more than '500 ( if that is the law in Aus )
Or like earlier said that could have been on the approach as well You can't determine the order of each individual clips as they are edited together.
Or like earlier said that could have been on the approach as well You can't determine the order of each individual clips as they are edited together.
