# Jets over cities?



## ark (29 Mar 2005)

Is there some restrictions for planes when flying over dense cities (altitude and time)? This morning at around 7:50 I was woken up by what sounded like a jet. I can't tell the altitude but all I know is that it was low enough to piss me off


----------



## Zoomie (29 Mar 2005)

It all depends on where you are and what that plane was doing.  Most high density airports have a noise abatement plan that attempts to reduce the noise complaints.  In Toronto, aircraft are prohibited from taking off or landing at the airport between specified hours (ie 0100-0500) and also have specific routes to follow when departing the aerodrome (usually the loudest time is on takeoff and the subsequent initial climb).


----------



## Inch (29 Mar 2005)

1000ft above the highest obstacle, unless there's noise abatement procedures in place like Zoomie mentioned. We regularly fly over the city of Halifax at 1000ft, though a Sea King is probably a little quieter than a jet.

Where are you located? If it's a military base, that's just the sound of freedom, it should be music to your ears!


----------



## TheCheez (30 Mar 2005)

I am awakened just about every Sat and Sun by 8AM F-18 launches. The novelty has almost worn off though.

Recently after a couple weeks vacation they woke me up and I forgot where I was started grumbling "#$%$% that jet is low, doesn't sound like an Airbus either, should probably go have a look" Then I opened my eyes and realised I was back in Bag-town and the holiday was done.


----------



## aesop081 (30 Mar 2005)

Inch said:
			
		

> 1000ft above the highest obstacle, unless there's noise abatement procedures in place like Zoomie mentioned. We regularly fly over the city of Halifax at 1000ft, though a Sea King is probably a little quieter than a jet.
> 
> Where are you located? If it's a military base, that's just the sound of freedom, it should be music to your ears!



Isn't it highest obstacle rounded to the next hundred feet plus 1000  (within 5NM of track) ?


----------



## Inch (30 Mar 2005)

aesop081 said:
			
		

> Isn't it highest obstacle rounded to the next hundred feet plus 1000   (within 5NM of track) ?



I think you're thinking IFR dude. IFR is 1000ft above the highest obstacle within 5nm of track unless you're in a designated mountainous region (1500ft east and 2000ft out west), VFR is 500ft and I don't remember what the lateral distance is, I'd have to confirm with the BGA100 tomorrow. In any case, I know for sure it's 1000ft above built up areas, unless you're taking off or landing.


----------



## condor888000 (30 Mar 2005)

VFR is 1000' above highest obstacle within 2000' horizontally.


----------



## Inch (30 Mar 2005)

condor888000 said:
			
		

> VFR is 1000' above highest obstacle within 2000' horizontally.



We're exempt from the CARS, we have our own regs, it's called the BGA-100. We routinely fly 500ft in helicopters unless we're over a built up area.


----------



## condor888000 (30 Mar 2005)

Fancy, learn somehting new everyday.....


----------



## Inch (30 Mar 2005)

condor888000 said:
			
		

> Fancy, learn somehting new everyday.....



It could very well be the same rules condor, those numbers sound familiar. I just don't recall off hand.

Here's the the exerpt from Part 1 of the CARS.....


102.01  These Regulations do not apply in respect of:

(a) military aircraft of Her Majesty in right of Canada when they are being manoeuvred under the authority of the Minister of National Defence;

(b) military aircraft of a country other than Canada, to the extent that the Minister of National Defence has exempted them from the application of these Regulations pursuant to subsection 5.9(2) of the Act; or

(c) model aircraft, rockets, hovercraft or wing-in-ground-effect machines, unless otherwise indicated in the Regulations.


----------



## aesop081 (30 Mar 2005)

Inch said:
			
		

> I think you're thinking IFR dude. IFR is 1000ft above the highest obstacle within 5nm of track unless you're in a designated mountainous region (1500ft east and 2000ft out west), VFR is 500ft and I don't remember what the lateral distance is, I'd have to confirm with the BGA100 tomorrow. In any case, I know for sure it's 1000ft above built up areas, unless you're taking off or landing.



Yeah, thats what i was thinking of...just realised it afterwards  ;D


----------



## I_am_John_Galt (30 Mar 2005)

condor888000 said:
			
		

> VFR is 1000' above highest obstacle within 2000' horizontally.



FWIW, this is CARS for airplanes over built-up areas ... helicopters is 1000' vertical & 500' horizontal ... also CARS is 500' vertical for any aircraft over non-populous areas & open water, barring other restrictions (i.e., fur farms) ... this seems to be consistent with what is being said about BGA-100 (edited: see below)


----------



## karl28 (30 Mar 2005)

I live   10 mins away from 8-wing Trenton . Those Herc   engines put me to sleep I miss the old 707 they had a great sound to them to .


----------



## Inch (30 Mar 2005)

I_am_John_Galt said:
			
		

> FWIW, this is CARS for airplanes over built-up areas ... helicopters is 1000' vertical & 500' horizontal ... also CARS is 500' vertical for any aircraft over non-populous areas & open water, barring other restrictions (i.e., fur farms) ... this seems to be consistent with what is being said about BGA-100



I'll confirm the restrictions on VFR over land flight tomorrow. 500' does not apply to us, we can do VFR nav at 250ft (Griffons can go even lower, like 15ft) and we routinely fly at 40' over the ocean and Halifax Harbour, all of which is legal.

There are a few differences between the CARS and the B-GA, such as approach bans. When there's an approach ban on at an airport, civilian operators are not permitted to shoot an approach to that airport, we can. We're also allowed to fly below 500ft for reasons other than take offs and landings (see the para above). We (helicopters) also do our circuits at 500ft vice 1000ft.


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2005)

"I miss the old 707"

Yep, and the Starfighters coming over the 3 Mech Cdo button in Baden.  They would come over in fives, and split.  They would turn 90 degrees on their side and off they would go, the rear two, then the middle two, then the lead.  It was cool. 

I DON'T miss living at the first Southwest OP at Kandahar Airfield.   You could throw a canteen cup and hit the wingtip of the landing C-17s, Hercs, and Cubs.  Loud.  Fun to visit it, murder when you live in it 24 hours a day.

Tom


----------



## Inch (31 Mar 2005)

Ok, here it goes. 

VFR non-built up areas

_1. Fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft shall not be flown below 1 000 feet and 500 feet respectively AGL or water except when:
   a. taking off, landing or conducting an authorized approach to an aerodrome;
   b. low flying has been authorized for prescribed low flying areas, or over specifically prescribed low level, cross country routes that have been flight checked and environmentally assessed (in accordance with CFAO 36 50 and 1 CAD Orders Vol 2 (Flying Orders) Art 2-002 Section 5), or over land or water areas designated by the  Commander 1 CAD for operational or operational training flights; 
   c. required by weather deteriorating to below minimum conditions on a VFR flight in order to maintain vertical separation from cloud while initiating alternative action.  Then fixed wing aircraft are authorized to fly not below 500 feet and rotary wing aircraft not below 300 feet AGL or water; or
   d. SVFR is authorized.  Chapter 7, para-graph 3 and Figures 7 1 and 7 2 or higher established 1 CAD limits then apply._

VFR over built up areas

_2. An aircraft shall not be flown over the built up area of any city, town or settlement, or over an open air assembly of persons, except at an altitude that will permit, in the event of an emergency, the landing of the aircraft without undue hazard to persons or property on the surfaces.  Such altitude shall not in any case be less than 1 000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2 000 feet from the aircraft , except when taking off, landing, conducting an authorized low approach to an aerodrome, or when authorized by the Commander 1 CAD._

Now the fun stuff.....

Low flying

_4. An aircraft shall not be flown lower than 50 feet over all obstacles that are within 200 feet of the track of the aircraft when flight is authorized for:
   a. practice forced or precautionary landing approaches over a prescribed forced landing area; or
   b. a low flying exercise over a prescribed low flying area.
   
5. Aircraft authorized to be flown over specifically selected low level, cross country routes shall not be flown lower than 250 feet above all obstacles that are within 500 feet of track

*6. The minima prescribed in Chapter 5, paragraphs 4 and 5, shall not apply to aircraft engaged in operational flying training or operational exercises in areas specifically authorized for such flights by the Commander 1 CAD.  The altitudes at which these flights will be conducted shall be set by the Commander 1 CAD and published in 1 CAD Orders.*_

1 CAD orders set out some even crazier limits. Maritime Helicopters in day VMC can manoeuvre at 40ft over the water while Tactical Helicopters are cleared down to 4ft (that's _four_ feet) in Tactical Low Flying Areas.

A wee bit different than what's permitted in the CARS.

*edited to separate the rules and my commentary


----------



## I_am_John_Galt (31 Mar 2005)

Inch said:
			
		

> A wee bit different that what's permitted in the CARS.



And so it is ... I stand corrected.


----------



## Warthor (8 Jan 2006)

I remeber being at home once a while ago and I was on the computer and i swear in a matter of like 5 seconds this jet whips right past my house, and it wasnt a passenger aircraft. It was fast and really low. Couldn't beleive it.


----------



## Slim (8 Jan 2006)

Warthor said:
			
		

> I remeber being at home once a while ago and I was on the computer and i swear in a matter of like 5 seconds this jet whips right past my house, and it wasnt a passenger aircraft. It was fast and really low. Couldn't beleive it.



Sorry about that...Won't happen again!

Sometimes its hard not to snake in low!


----------



## Warthor (8 Jan 2006)

Lol scared the hell outta me


----------



## 3rd Herd (8 Jan 2006)

From the tree hugger in BC

Red Wine Mountains Caribou Herd
•Due to the proximity of this herd to 5 Wing Goose Bay, it is the most susceptible to disturbance from the low-level training program
•As this herd is in a steady state of decline, it remains a major research focus for the Institute
Dr. Louis LaPierre Ph.D. Institute ChairHalifax, June 8th, 2004
•The Institute is an advisory bodyreporting to the Ministers of National Defence and Environment on impactsand mitigation relating to military aircraft training activities in Labradorand Northeastern Quebec
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:L4kBN3Dohq4J:www.iemr.org/Wrkgrps/uploads/overview_IEMR_june_04_2.pdf+caribou+goose+bay&hl=en


----------



## Sheerin (8 Jan 2006)

Ah the good old Viper Mk II. 

I live in Toronto by the lake (scarborough to be exact - on the scarborough bluffs no less) and from time to time I can hear (and feel) C-130s flying overhead, presumably doing SAR.

Its quite impressive.  

I remember one morning when I was in grade 4 or 5 I was walking to school and a C-130 flew maybe 500 feet above my head.  It was damned impressive and it scared the shit out of me.  SInce i was young I really didn't know much about military equipment and I thought it was a bomber and that the Air Force had designated my home area as a bombing range and no one told me.

Yeah I had quite the imagination.


----------



## 3rd Herd (29 Jan 2006)

An example of complaint and an example of the way in which it was handled:

From the Arizona Republic online..... 

A complaint posted and the reply: 

Complaint: 

Quote: 

A wake-up call from Luke's jets 

Jun. 23, 2005 12:00 AM 

"Question of the day for Luke Air Force Base: 
Whom do we thank for the morning air show? 

Last Wednesday, at precisely 9:11 a.m., a tight formation of four 
F-16 jets made a low pass over Arrowhead Mall, 
continuing west over Bell Road at approximately 500 feet. Imagine 
our good fortune! 

Do the Tom Cruise-wannabes feel we need this 
wake-up call, or were they trying to impress the cashiers at 
Mervyns' early-bird special? 

Any response would be appreciated." 

"The reply is classic, and a testament to the professionalism and 
heroism of the folks in the armed services. The response:"  

Quote: 


Regarding "A wake-up call from Luke's jets" 
(Letters, Thursday): 

On June 15, at precisely 9:12 a.m., a perfectly timed four-ship of 
F-16s from the 63rd Fighter Squadron at Luke Air Force Base flew 
over the grave of Capt Jeremy Fresques. 

Capt. Fresques was an Air Force officer who waspreviously stationed 
at Luke Air Force Base and was killed in Iraq on 
May 30, Memorial Day. 

At 9 a.m. on June 15, his family and friends gathered at Sunland 
Memorial Park in Sun City to mourn the loss of a husband, son and 
friend. 

Based on the letter writer's recount of the flyby, and because of 
the jet noise, I'm sure you didn't hear the 21-gun salute, the 
playing of taps, or my words to the widow and parents of Capt. 
Fresques as I gave them their son's flag on behalf of the president 
of the United States and all those veterans and servicemen and women 
who understand the sacrifices they have endured. 

A four-ship flyby is a display of respect the Air Force pays to 
those who give their lives in defense of freedom. We are 
professional aviators and take our jobs seriously, and on June 15 
what the letter writer witnessed was four officers lining up to pay 
their ultimate respects. 

The letter writer asks, "Whom do we thank for the morning air show?" 

The 56th Fighter Wing will call for you, and forward your thanks to 
the widow and parents of Capt. Fresques, and thank them for you, for 
it was in their honor that my pilots flew the most honorable 
formation of their lives. 

Lt. Col. Scott Pleus 
CO 63rd Fighter Squadron 
Luke Air Force Base 

Choo


----------



## aesop081 (29 Jan 2006)

it doesnt get more professional than that


----------



## Journeyman (16 Feb 2006)

3rd Herd said:
			
		

> From the Arizona Republic online.....  A wake-up call from Luke's jets



Been forwarding it since I first read it.....  (I know LOTS of tree-huggers    )


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Feb 2006)

Would love to know if the guy who made the complaint ever responded


----------



## Crimmsy (16 Feb 2006)

He did. See http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/wakeup.asp



> Regarding "Flyby honoring fallen comrade" (Letters, June 28):
> 
> I read with increasing embarrassment and humility the response to my unfortunate letter to The Republic concerning an Air Force flyby ("A wake-up call from Luke's jets," Letters, June 23).
> 
> ...


----------



## condor888000 (18 Feb 2006)

Might just be me, but if he served in the navy, wouldn't it make sense that he would be aware of the fly by's meaning?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (18 Feb 2006)

condor888000 said:
			
		

> Might just be me, but if he served in the navy, wouldn't it make sense that he would be aware of the fly by's meaning?



Not necessarily. You're talking about a VERY BIG organization, of which some members never have contact with the Air side of their Arm.


----------



## condor888000 (18 Feb 2006)

True, didn't think of that...


----------

