Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sultana
Exactly. There should have been no way in hell any kind of an aircraft could have gotten that low in a metropolitan area. I don't even mean because of 9/11, I mean just in general, Avionics rules and regs. Post 9/11, he shouldn't have been able to get *anywhere near* that rediculously low altitude. I'd love to read a transcript of the air traffic controller's interactions with them. see what what going on. So far no one (in the news) has suggested there was any kind of malfunction with the aircraft....
|
From an
article in today's Wall Street Journal regarding the crash:
Quote:
The plane in yesterday's crash was flying along the East River under rules that allow small aircraft to skirt Manhattan as long as they stay under 1,100 feet. A similar corridor along the Hudson River also allows for flights using "visual flight rules," where pilots use their eyes and ears, rather than instruments, to navigate their way.
Similarly, Federal Aviation Administration rules allow small aircraft to fly through major cities across the country, allowing the operation of planes that take off from small downtown airports and helicopters that land at convention centers, hospitals and heliports.
|
Seems like flying low is pretty much kosher. I know next to nothing about FAA rules and regulations, but the portion of the article quoted above was very interesting to me.