Confined Area - Legal minimum heights for Hi Recce
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk
Age: 85
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My teaching with regard to recce height is to arrive at about 1000 ft agl for a look at the general situation, eg houses, wires, obstacles, wind etc to determine the likely circuit and approach patterns. Then a pass into wind to have a detailed look in the landing area/power check followed by the circuit and approach from which you intend to land. This covers the the slightly ambiguous law which says that you are only absolved from the 500 ft rule when approaching to land or takeing off in accordance with good aviaton practice. If on the approach, something causes you to be unhappy, then you go around in accordance with good aviation practice. Deliberately doing an approach from which you do not intend to land is the one which a lawyer might might relish in the event of a complaint. If you know the landing area well, then omit the 1000 ft bit.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotorfossil,
where do you live? (No pun intended...)
I wish I had that kind of ceiling - most of the time the ceiling here is at 1000 or just below. Have some terrain between sealevel and the clouds, often you will not even get the 500 AGL.
I really don't care what the laywer says, as long as the law says I am on approach. Sometimes it takes a trial approach to figure out IF it is possible to do it at all - slow, but above translational.
If it works, come back and shoot it.
Sometimes the intended approach turns sour and a third one will have to be done.
What if the intention was to land, but things just don't look right before you get to your decision point and you abort - go somewhere else.
How is a laywer going to proof you just came in to annoy everybody or put all their lives and property in jeopardy?
The main thing is that you have some profesional people at the hearing
Generally it will be fairly easy to figure out, whether you were at work or just hot dogging with a lame excuse.
3top
where do you live? (No pun intended...)
I wish I had that kind of ceiling - most of the time the ceiling here is at 1000 or just below. Have some terrain between sealevel and the clouds, often you will not even get the 500 AGL.
I really don't care what the laywer says, as long as the law says I am on approach. Sometimes it takes a trial approach to figure out IF it is possible to do it at all - slow, but above translational.
If it works, come back and shoot it.
Sometimes the intended approach turns sour and a third one will have to be done.
What if the intention was to land, but things just don't look right before you get to your decision point and you abort - go somewhere else.
How is a laywer going to proof you just came in to annoy everybody or put all their lives and property in jeopardy?
The main thing is that you have some profesional people at the hearing
Generally it will be fairly easy to figure out, whether you were at work or just hot dogging with a lame excuse.
3top
Gosh,
This is getting all complicated isn't it. Shallow as possible approaches, Low Recce's other than that done on approach into the area....three times around and...and...and....!
It would seem....one orbit (but take as many as you need) called the Hi Recce, followed by a power check, prelanding check....turn final....using a normal to steep approach angle to stay as high as possible as long as possible....and be able to see the far one third of the landing zone....low recce on final from 300 feet down. The Hi Recce determines wind, considers turbulence, obstructions in the confined area, wires and other hazards, lowest obstacles, safest route in....safest route out and the escape route....should a balked landing be done.
Are we making a mountain out of a confined area?
If someone complains....explain the procedure you used. If the CAA Gits ....errrr....Guys.....cannot understand what you are telling them....then you are in trouble but not until then.
This is getting all complicated isn't it. Shallow as possible approaches, Low Recce's other than that done on approach into the area....three times around and...and...and....!
It would seem....one orbit (but take as many as you need) called the Hi Recce, followed by a power check, prelanding check....turn final....using a normal to steep approach angle to stay as high as possible as long as possible....and be able to see the far one third of the landing zone....low recce on final from 300 feet down. The Hi Recce determines wind, considers turbulence, obstructions in the confined area, wires and other hazards, lowest obstacles, safest route in....safest route out and the escape route....should a balked landing be done.
Are we making a mountain out of a confined area?
If someone complains....explain the procedure you used. If the CAA Gits ....errrr....Guys.....cannot understand what you are telling them....then you are in trouble but not until then.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bedfordshire
Age: 51
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was taught to perform a power check en-route/within the vicinity to your confined area and nor necessarily in the circuit as it's just one less thing to do whilst you're assessing your confined area. Our high level recce would be done at around 750-800ft AGL, assess the first 2 of the 5 s's (size, shape, slope, surface, surroundings) and make an initial stab at the other 3 as sometimes they can be only really assessed on your low recce/final approach. When in the circuit into wind we could safely reduce airspeed enough to give us a leisurely pass-by of the site and make an accurate assessment (which potentially reduces the overall number of circuits), turn X-wind, downwind, and then turn onto base starting your descent from around 750-800ft AGL to 500ft AGL making sure that as you complete your final turn onto final "wings level" between 300-500ft for final approach at 40 Kts IAS into wind.
On my CPL test I did 2 circuits, and the examiner said he thought he was going to grow a beard!, on debrief, he said that anymore than 2 circuits and he would have questioned my ability at tackling a confined area and he would have thought about failing me on it!
On my CPL test I did 2 circuits, and the examiner said he thought he was going to grow a beard!, on debrief, he said that anymore than 2 circuits and he would have questioned my ability at tackling a confined area and he would have thought about failing me on it!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: A land not far from here.
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaysus, who was your examiner!!??
Its a shame that some examiners these days are no more better at flying than those they are testing!! Now, fair enough, its not the case for all examiners, but by all means it's true for some..!!
I heard a story once where an LPC was being done on an owners own aircraft, and the examiner gave out to the owner during the test for progressively flaring the heli (r44) in an auto, upon the owner questioning the examiner to see how he did it, they proceded to go around and the examiner showed the owner how to do 'an auto', in the end, the owner had to take control of the heli because the EXAMINER nearly smashed the heli into the ground!!!! Proof o be weary of who you fly with!!
Its a shame that some examiners these days are no more better at flying than those they are testing!! Now, fair enough, its not the case for all examiners, but by all means it's true for some..!!
I heard a story once where an LPC was being done on an owners own aircraft, and the examiner gave out to the owner during the test for progressively flaring the heli (r44) in an auto, upon the owner questioning the examiner to see how he did it, they proceded to go around and the examiner showed the owner how to do 'an auto', in the end, the owner had to take control of the heli because the EXAMINER nearly smashed the heli into the ground!!!! Proof o be weary of who you fly with!!
