On 2006-10-14, Emily wrote:
You're doing it again. I'm well aware of what the FAR states, I'm just
unclear as to how flying over a city violates it. I've routinely flown
over Chicago, never less than the required MSA and always with a landing
site in mind.

In many places, there are no forced landing sites which do not cause
undue hazard to people or property on the ground. I'm very familiar with
Houston (the last big city I lived in), and the I-10 corridor was a
popular VFR route across the city between the two class B surface areas
(which, during the day, if you weren't actually going to HOU or IAH, you
weren't going to get clearance to transit).

There are only a few places in that highly congested area which
constitute a place where you can land without causing undue hazard to
people or property - and then, generally only in an aircraft that can
land easily in a small amount of space. People flew it all the time in
hot singles which the only place they could realistically put down would
be I-10 itself - which certainly is causing undue hazards to those on
the ground. You could argue in that in something slow with a steep
approach path (say, a 150 or a 172 with barn door flaps) that you could
land in some of the patches of wasteland in the I-10 corridor without
causing an undue hazard.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de