Emergency declared in circuit due to IMC

[photofly]

Twenty feet over someone's house while practicing a forced approach would be in breach of 602.14(2) and unlawful, whereas flying a downwind at 500 agl over someone's house isn't.

[TT1900]

"Legal? Yes. Good neighbour? Not so much."

I would think that you'd be doing a student a disservice if said student was not shown low level circuits at some point in their training. A lower-than-normal circuit altitude usually means lower ceiling than normal (obviously) and maybe more importantly, a reduced visibility. A "Special VFR" day would be perfect...

I agree with both of you.

Just because something is legal does not make it intelligent; examples are plentiful sometimes with fatal consequences. If this was a student pilot on a solo the decision making of the instructor & school should be examined closely. The student should also be questioned as to his comfort level. If this was a licensed pilot then both he and the school need to have an honest debrief.

Circuits deviating from normal should absolutely be introduced during training when appropriate, with an experienced instructor on board. Demonstrates there are always alternate options, builds capacity, strengthens decision-making.

At the end of the day, even if you’re superbly trained, bad stuff happens and you need to deal with it. Good call to declare the emergency if he/she felt it was required. Glad everyone is alright. Use it as a learning experience & teaching point.

[pelmet]

The 1000' above the nearest obstacle within 2000' rule does not apply during "takeoff, approach and landing" and is not applicable to circuits. Circuits are generally acceptable anything down to 500agl if in a control zone, maybe lower.

Several PSTAR exam questions reinforce the point that circuits flown at no point higher than 500 agl are acceptable to Transport Canada, as long as you remain 500' below the cloud base. Or request special VFR.

That is interesting. I would like to see the exact questions and answers on that one(if somehow available). I know you pretty much answered it, but would one be considered legal to be doing 500 foot circuits in airports located in urban areas?

Thanks.

Questions 6.08, 6.09 and 6.10.

Airports in urban areas must be certificated, and not registered (aerodromes). TC assesses and approves operations at certificated airports. If TC judges extra restrictions on circuits at specific airports are required, they can impose them, through CAR 602.96(3)(d) by specifying them in the CFS.

Otherwise, fill your boots.

Thanks for the good info. It actually makes clearer a certain situation at a certain airport I am familiar with but I don't think it really answers to the exact legality of the altitude you can fly circuits at a particular airport. Does Ottawa have a certain altitude listed in the CFS? And any more direct info about an altitude that can be flown in the circuit and be legal?

Thanks.

[photofly]

Honestly I think trying to put an exact altitude where a circuit is too low to be "legal" isn't fruitful. We don't have a simple set lower limit in Canada, and the low flying regulations that we do have are a mixture of weather limits, obstacle clearance limits and emergency scenario limits each of which have their own range of validities and exceptions. If these rules are tricky for you and me to piece together, then they're also difficult for Transport Canada enforcement to work their way through to make a case against a pilot, too. I think those guys have enough work on their desks dealing with the really obvious infractions, and of those, the ones that generate public complaints.

Maybe this is another way of saying the same thing: what's too low to be legal? Transport Canada will know it when they see it. So will you.

[Braun]

As an ATC I can guarantee that as soon as a VFR pilot enters IMC conditions we consider an emergency even if the pilot doesn't "declare" one. Good job on the pilot asking for help. Honestly, this happens fairly often.