"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:18:04 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news

Six hundred feet is markedly less than 500 feet:


Uhh, no it isn't. Six hundred feet is more than 500 feet.



§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may
operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet
above the surface, except over open water or sparsely
populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be
operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle,
or structure.


I fail to see the connection between minimum safe altitudes and lateral
separation between aircraft.


Perhaps you know of other separation criteria that may have applied in
the situation under discussion.


There are none. FAR 91.111(a) says only, "No person may operate an aircraft
so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard." FAR
91.111(b) says, "No person may operate an aircraft in formation flight
except by arrangement with the pilot in command of each aircraft in the
formation.", but to my knowledge there is no definition of "formation
flight" in 14 CFR Part 1.



Lacking that, I believe § 91.119 to be applicable in this case.


How do you interpret the intent of this sentence?

In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500
feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

I infer 'closer' to include laterally as well as vertically. If
that's not correct, then the word 'above' or 'over' would have been
used.


Yeah, but you also believe six hundred feet is markedly less than 500 feet,
so your beliefs carry little weight.

I infer it to mean there is a hemisphere of 500' radius centered on any
person, vessel, or structure on the surface within which an aircraft may not
be flown.