Some people are morons...

[Wing Nut]

I was walking out to the car today and I couldn't believe my eyes.  Some idiot was up at about 500 feet doing sharp banks and dives over a populated area in a C172.  ::)  At one time he must have banked about 70 degrees!  I think he was trying to do a roll.  A short time later I saw him going over the mall doing at least 200 knots...

How do you report someone like that?

[beaky]

Contact your local FSDO.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/

But make sure you have your facts straight... 200 knots in a C172? You'd have to roll it over on its back at 10,000 and wait for the wings to come off before it hit 200 knots.

But it does sound like he was horsing around below the legal altitude... probably the second-greatest cause of GA accidents after VFR flight into IMC. Without the N-number it could be hard to prove anything, but go ahead and report it.

[Wing Nut]

Ok, I could be wrong about the speed, but there is no way what this guy was doing could be considered safe...  :P  It was low enough I could almost read some writing on the bottom of the wing without binoculars.

[Splinter562]

Before you report it, you should be sure of a few things. Rottydaddy already pointed out the airspeed. But also know the regs for altitudes:

- 1000ft altitude "Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons"
- 500ft altitude for uncongested areas,
- 0 ft altitude (but 500ft lateral seperation) for "open water or sparsely populated areas"

I'm not saying that it's not a stupid thing for the pilot to be doing, but the line between "congested" and "uncongested" can be fairly subjective so it may or may not technically be a bust.

If you do want to report him and you've got the N number and the time and date, you might be able to report it to the FSDO. They probably still couldn't "bust" him, having not witnessed the even themselves. They may be able to pull up a radar track , and if the guy was stupid enough to be doing that with a Mode S transponder, they may be able to confirm it. I don't know if they'd do that though, just speculating.

If you know that the plane belonged to a certain flight school, you might be able to report it to them. Chances are they'd know who was flying it and maybe reprimand the pilot.

[The Ruptured Duck]

I'm not too proud to admit that before I got my ppl, a co-worker took me up and did some unauthorized manuvers over the airport at low altitude.

[Splinter562]

Aeronautical decision making is a huge part of being a successful pilot. It has, and will continue to be heavily researched (see: Duck). It ultimately boils down to how good a judge you are of your situation, your aircraft, and yourself. If you misjudge any one of the three, you could be heading for trouble and not even know it.

The FAA regulations are really secondary to good judgment. In fact, FAA regulations are not set up to prevent you from killing yourself. If you were to always use FAA standards rather than your own personal standards, you'd run yourself into the ground very quickly. The FAA regulations are really set up to prevent you from taking other people down with you.

For example; there's no rule saying you can't fly at night if you haven't done so in 20 years (so long as you have a current medical and BFR), but you can't carry passengers unless you are night current. The minimum altitude regulations are set up in a similar way, not every pilot is safe operating in close proximity to the ground, but it is legal to do so, so long as if you hit the ground, you're not likely to hit people. Hence only the lateral requirement in sparsely populated areas. However, the great the chance you'll hit persons or property, the higher the minimum altitude (500ft uncongested, 1000ft congested).

[newberiffic]

For sure I agree that you need your facts straight and the altitudes listed are true, I just want to add that a 172 @ 1000 ft looks pretty big from below, and a 172 @ 500ft looks like you could reach out and touch it. It sounds to me like he was well within minimums because I have yet to see an airplane 1000 ft away that I couldnt read the tail # especially a 172 the #'s are a foot tall.

There are always idiots that learn to fly too.

I once had a farmer report me for aerobatics over one of his fields in my Pitts, he claimed that I was dangerous and looping and rolling all over the place..... he later learned that I was in a waiver'd aerobatic box with a floor of 1800 ft with 2 spotters on the ground judging me on the known sequence "preparing for a competition"
one of the few times the FAA actually helped me!

yey he was 100% sure I was doing something wrong.

[beaky]

It's very possible this pilot was technically not violating any rule, but it could be that he (or she) was showing off, low to the ground, to get someone's attention... something that certainly violates the spirit of the FARs... which basically boil down to "don't do anything stupid, moron".

Even normal steep turns, etc should be done at a healthy altitude, and certainly not over a mall parking lot.

If you want to show off in front of folks and risk your own neck doing it, get some aerobatic training and a suitable plane and enter some competitions... you'll be less likely to kill anybody else that way.

[Boss_BlueAngels]

My my friends at IAC Chapter 67 sure have some interesting stories of former friends who managed to get away with some crazy things.  2 passenger flight in a Yak-55, inverted runway buzz, solo flight in the back seat of a tripacer while in formation with someone else, buzzing friends houses... sometimes I think God protects the stupid.  lol

[Aerophile]

Disclamer: I'm pressed for time so I didn't read each individual post.

I was at my son's baseball practice yesterday and saw some moron fly really low over a house  about two miles away (looked like -200 AGL as he disappeared behind the trees).  I saw him put the plane into a slip as he zoomed past the house.  Looked like he was in a champ, but then again it could have been anything as my tailwheel aircraft recognition isn't that great.  I thought about calling the local approach control and reporting the dumb@$$.  It really perturbs me to observe such careless acts. To bad he was too far off and into the sun to get his numbers.

As far as the speed goes, depending on winds, it is possible to get a small airplane's groundspeed faster than 200 kts which is what you would have observed from the ground. I've gotten a Diamond Eclipse (katana) up to 215 kts groundspeed (trues at 120ish), but that was with +100 kt tailwind at 9,000 feet.  Unless the winds were 80kts at the surface, i seriously doubt they were going that fast in a 172.

Thanks for sharing though, and I'm glad to see that others have respect for being responsible.