motoadve wrote:Samintel: Between Darrington and Concrete, you probably seen those before, on the eastern farthest end, I flew back same route and marked the GPS at the exact point where the powerlines crosses the river, will give those coordenates to you.

Thanks for the tip Contact.

I know this is not new for many pilots here.

I have climber over those same power lines (between Concrete and Darrington) a couple of times doing the same thing. I knew they were there, and they are charted of course on the sectional. Passing between the power lines and a cable is a bit too adventuresome for me.

I would not rely on it exclusively - but saw this on the garmin site when I was looking at their handheld - WireAware
WireAware Wire-Strike Avoidance Technology

WireAware graphically overlays comprehensive power line location and altitude information on the moving map. Altitude display is offered in both mean sea level (MSL) and above ground level (AGL), so they are easier to identify relative to the aircraft path. With optional Terrain and Awareness Warning System (HTAWS/TAWS), visual and aural alerts are provided, offering an additional layer of protection. New basic obstacle databases contain Hazardous Obstacle Transmission (HOT) lines, which typically include those that span rivers, canyons, valleys or are within the vicinity of airports.

corefile wrote:I would not rely on it exclusively - but saw this on the garmin site when I was looking at their handheld - WireAware
WireAware Wire-Strike Avoidance Technology

WireAware graphically overlays comprehensive power line location and altitude information on the moving map. Altitude display is offered in both mean sea level (MSL) and above ground level (AGL), so they are easier to identify relative to the aircraft path. With optional Terrain and Awareness Warning System (HTAWS/TAWS), visual and aural alerts are provided, offering an additional layer of protection. New basic obstacle databases contain Hazardous Obstacle Transmission (HOT) lines, which typically include those that span rivers, canyons, valleys or are within the vicinity of airports.

That still relies on accuracy in the database. If they've been plotted wrong in the database, that's not much help. While I can't say anything about "Wire Aware", I do know that the Garmin databases about obstacles leave much to be desired. Two examples:

West of Seward, NE, there is a tower that extends up to 1465' AGL. Climbing out of Seward, it showed on my 96C handheld, the database of which I'd updated only a month earlier. It should have appeared to the right of our path, according to the GPS. So my buddy and I were looking for it, when suddenly it flashed by on the left side of the airplane. We were above it by maybe 100-200', but had we been at a lower altitude and relying on the GPS to be accurate....

Northeast of Fort Collins, not far from the farm strip where I hangared my airplane for a year, there's been a tower that extends to 6000' MSL (753' AGL) for many years. Recently, a second tower has been constructed next to it, and the sectional has the double tower symbol. So both my 430W, the obstacle database of which was updated a year ago, and the 96C, which was also updated a year ago, show the old tower and its sister. But neither on the sectional nor on Garmin's databases does a third tower show, which has been constructed perhaps a half mile or so away a couple of years ago, and which appears to be just as tall.

I have to assume that if the towers don't show, or don't show accurately, then it's likely that wires may not show accurately or at all, either. For one thing, towers and wires can be constructed in a matter of days between database updates, but for another thing, there's no guarantee that the databases will be programmed accurately. I have nothing at all against flying low, but I don't do it much anymore, due to the proliferation of towers and wires that weren't very common when I was a fledgling pilot. It used to be fun, scooting along at 5-600' AGL or lower, but now with a few towers extending as tall as 2000' AGL and many in the 5-750' AGL range, it's getting too dangerous.

Cary

Seeing obstacles and aircraft below the horizon or terrain is vastly more difficult than seeing obstacles and aircraft above the horizon or terrain. Human clutter increases the problem. High increases safety. Low increases situational awareness.

The most unsafe altitude with the least reliable situational awareness is any altitude neither really high nor really low.

I gave this some thought and being so low is what saved me from hitting the power lines .
Only option was going under,no turn or around, no climb was possible,it got even more exciting when i saw the lower cable though

If I was 100ft higher then it would have been real bad.

I was working under wires around the entire border of a field. One way no fence under the wire, the other way fence under wire. I knew this but after several loads I spaced this data. On the first clean up run I found out late and had to split the very tight difference.

To me flying down a river or canyon at low level in unfamiliar territory is the same thing as diving into a field to spray without first circling the area at least twice looking for poles with wires. Insane and goes against risk assessment. Buddy of mine was killed not long ago, wire strike over a river in a Jetranger. Sad.

Lesson learned, this is what this thread its exactly about.

Which is why I posted it, maybe can save someone, by seeing all this accounts by posters who actually experienced them or had a close encounter.

Agreed!

This pilot ended up in jail following a tragic wire strike accident.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... e-accident

whynotfly wrote:This pilot ended up in jail following a tragic wire strike accident.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... e-accident

This is a very sad story. The pilot was offering rides to the public. He then struck a powerline while flying well below 500' over a stretch of river he did not know. The passenger was killed. In a very recent, and very similar situation involving an auto (reckless driving that resulted in a fatality and some severe injuries) the driver was charged and received a similar sentence.

I guess "PIC" means we're also responsible for safe and reasonable flight. Imagine that!

Wow, makes me think twice about giving rides, which I rarely do anyway. Now I don't feel so guilty I don't offer to do it more often.

courierguy wrote:Wow, makes me think twice about giving rides, which I rarely do anyway. Now I don't feel so guilty I don't offer to do it more often.

I don't think the lesson is, don't give rides. The lesson is, don't take any unnecessary chances when you do give rides.

Cary

Cary wrote:

courierguy wrote:Wow, makes me think twice about giving rides, which I rarely do anyway. Now I don't feel so guilty I don't offer to do it more often.

I don't think the lesson is, don't give rides. The lesson is, don't take any unnecessary chances when you do give rides.

Cary

Like.

CamTom12 wrote:

Cary wrote:

courierguy wrote:Wow, makes me think twice about giving rides, which I rarely do anyway. Now I don't feel so guilty I don't offer to do it more often.

I don't think the lesson is, don't give rides. The lesson is, don't take any unnecessary chances when you do give rides.

Cary

Like.

I would say the bigger lesson here is don't "F" around and do stupid shit.

As far as rides, yep, something to consider but as in anything, there is a risk involved, best thing to do is minimize the risk as much as possible.

Although I've never seen one while flying, it's also good to be aware of this growing sport called slack lining. This video is from a world record slack line that was walked in Castle Valley UT. I have no idea if they put up a TFR when they do something big like this.

Pretty cool, but would hate to see it coming though my prop as I was doing some low level sight seeing.

I actually reached out to Theo, the slack liner from this video via Facebook to ask him what precautions they took to prevent aircraft from hitting the line. He responded with in hours and let me know that they filed a NOTAM, reached out many of the local pilots as well and had 3 helicopters filming. Obviously this level of planning doesn't happen with all slackline projects, but hopefully it's standard practice with the big span ones where an aircraft could more easily hit the line.

Bottom line I think, as others have said, scout the area from above before flying low, keep your eyes peeled, and do a thorough briefing with NOTAM search before all flights.

What is legally very nice about IFR is that the rules are laid out clearly so that everyone is on the same page. A VFR flight is legally less clear because the variables and so numerous and somewhat different for every flight. Maneuvering flight has few legal legs to stand on. There is no way to be legally preflight reviewed because the data is fluid to non-existent. Even crop dusting, the unstable legal leg says that "when practicable we will be 2,000' laterally or 500' above any manmade structure.

To engage in maneuvering flight with the assumption that we have reviewed all the necessary data for the operation is ludicrous in such a fluid environment. Ol Victor Charlie is out there. He is exactly where he can do the most harm. He wants to kill us.

courierguy wrote:Wow, makes me think twice about giving rides, which I rarely do anyway. Now I don't feel so guilty I don't offer to do it more often.

Speaking a giving rides I have mixed feelings on it now. When I was a new pilot I took a lot of pleasure in giving rides to people because it was such a new thing in my life and a lot of fun to show people my flying skills.

I have a number of years of flying under my belt now and I am finding that giving joy rides to people doesn't interest me nearly as much as before. And when I do give a "ride" I do find myself flying a bit different profile. I fly over water a lot. If I have passengers I will often fly at a higher altitude than when solo to give myself more options in an engine failure. Just nice cautious flying. Your passengers wont know the diff.

Most new passengers who maybe haven't been in a small plane before are plenty thrilled with simply the experience of flight in a small plane and buzzing around the patch. They really don't need to go screaming down some river 20 ft above the water to get excited. If your going to do that....do it solo.

I've gotten where people have to really nag me before I take them up, a casual request gets a casual response from me. My last rider was a friend's girlfriend who simply wouldn't shut up about wanting to go flying, it got so bad I couldn't stop at the local watering hole if her Caddy was parked out front, as she would start in again.

Finally, I told her, "OK tomorrow, 7:00 AM, and you're buying breakfast." I figured she wouldn't show and that would be the end of it. Damned if she wasn't there, and we had a great time as she was ideal as a passenger (make of that what you will.) The only glitch was when, once at the cafe in Afton across from the airport, she found out they don't serve beer there on Sunday morning, until 10 anyway, this cracked me up as I had no idea they served beer there at all. Once back at my place we hung out on the deck until my fridge was beerless, what a woman

My next passenger will probably be a local guy who got one armed chewed off a couple years ago by a flipped over high powered snowmachine. He flies a powered parachute now, and still rides sleds too.