I’m not sure what the forensic value of ADS-B data and/or FlightAware but now that we are all broadcasting where we are and what we are doing - allegedly with WAAS accuracy, I suppose it’s going to be put to the test.

on the other hand, I suppose you could go to the FAA N-number database, look up the aircraft ownership, and send them an anonymous letter referencing the FlightAware data for the flight and asking them WTF they thought they were doing. It might prevent a repetition - maybe.

 

Maybe a little close to home. You can change. We all can change. Even Mr.500 ft.
Why not send a letter to this pilot, why not engage in a phone call. Try to understand, love and forgive one another. Mr.500 probably didn’t even know he upset you and could probably use that perspective.

 

For me personally I would take absolutely no pleasure in reporting this to the FSDO, which is why I wanted this forums input on the matter. Writing a letter seems like a great idea just to know what was up. Again, I don't want to put somebody's cert. at stake, especially in these times. Thanks a bunch for the replies!

 

I was a FASTeam represenative for a number of years. I made quite a few calls to pilots who were reported of low flying or ostentatious displays ... I would call the pilot and tell them that I had received a call that someone was concerned about them and that I was concerned about their safety ... A soft start so to speak. If the guy had a good attitude I would file my de-identified report and the world continued to turn. Bad attitude I would turn it over to the head of the FASTeam at the FSDO. They would use the same soft start approach. None of this applies to repeat offenders.

If you call the FAA I suggest you talk to the FASTeam guy ... You can probably get a reassurance that they will talk to the guy without a violation. Most guys will do this unless the pilot has a thick file. Then give him the details.

I have seen this make a difference.

But then others ... Not so much.

 

These days the FSDO doesn't hammer people unless they tell the inspector to go pound sand. That means if the person is willing to fix said deviation and agree to a corrective action, no certificate action is taken. This is the required approach. It generally takes some fairly egregious acts these days to result in certificate action and actual enforcement cases, which is good, it reduces workload and allows for a much better way to address issues. That all said, I have to wonder about the safety culture that some people seem to be promoting: Anything is ok as long as you can get away with it. The FSDO inspector will investigate it to determine if there is any actual violation/deviation, such as flying low in the vicinity of the airport for the purpose of takeoff/landing is totally appropriate and the actual altitude is what matters, very hard to eyeball for anyone. In this case, there is at least more to go on than the usual "someone flew low over my house", which is akin to "someone just drove really fast through my neighborhood". There are ATC pilot deviations sent to the FSDO for investigation that result in nothing because a violation is not substantiated.

 

Story time.

I was out sailing with a lady friend a few years back, and a guy in a light single was doing low passes over the harbor. Probably 200-300’ AGL over the mooring field, turning, descending to 100-150’ or so over some large estates on the water...lap after lap after lap, getting lower and lower and lower. Nothing honestly hazardous about the flying in my book, but he was definitely lower than 500’ over people/vessels/structures.

Normally, I enjoy a good low pass...but this was getting annoying after about lap 12.

I shot a quick message to the FSDO, withholding the N number, asking if they knew of a single engine Cessna operating at very low altitude in the vicinity on that date and time.

They said it was an airplane with a photography crew doing aerial shoots for a popular TV series, all preapproved. Asked if I witnessed anything unprofessional.

”Nope, good to go.”

Additionally, civilians are terrible at this stuff. A Navy fighter aircrew was accused of flying over UC Berkeley years ago at like 300-400’ by some civilians. It was all over the news.

They pulled the maintenance card data and figured out that the civilians were off by an order of magnitude. Sick one, nerds.

 

There is an entire facebook page dedicated to some small town in florida which reports every single navy t-6 that flies overhead...typically on approach to landing....and they scream and complain that they are doing 'dive bombing' on their houses....

Anyway....i would not take 3rd party reports as gospel at this point

 

We’ve made the national news a few times of recent.
People are very wary of low flying aircraft for sure.