Rv-7 pilot reported maneuvering over a congested area at 1;200 ft and later considered he may have v...

Narrative:

Depending on how the FAA interprets far 91.303; I may have inadvertently performed what might be considered as aerobatic flight over a congested area. In the afternoon I was on my way to ZZZ airport to fly; I had a couple of friends ask me to fly over so they could see my aircraft in flight. Being well aware of the requirements part 91.119; safe altitudes over congested areas; and also always wanting to be friendly to non-flying public who may not enjoy aircraft noise; I maintained an altitude allowing above 91.119 minimums. I had always assumed aerobatic flight to be linked to the angle of 30 degrees. As I flew over the house; I orbited at bank angles meeting part 91.307 (c) and altitudes meeting part 91.119. Prior to and during this time; I visually and electronically (tis and ads-B) cleared the area for other aircraft. Based on my proficiency (I used to fly USAF fighters very low level at 500+ knots) and currency; I considered all maneuvering was conducted safely and smoothly. I ensured that any flight exceeding the limits of part 91.307 (c) was conducted over open fields and above 1500 feet; per part 91.303. Later; while reviewing the fars in preparation for conducting a biennial flight review; I realized that the bank and pitch angle limits I used for aerobatic flight were only stated in the paragraph for parachute requirements; and that aerobatic flight was defined as 'an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude; and abnormal attitude; or abnormal acceleration; not necessary for normal flight.' I am not certain what legally defines 'abrupt' changes or 'abnormal' attitudes; however; I expect the FAA to use the most conservative values; especially with their special emphasis on maneuvering flight; so that is why I am filing this [safety report].as a result; I am immediately implementing two changes to my flying:1) restrict all flight over congested areas to a maximum of 30 degrees bank and <10 degrees of pitch.2) stress wording of far 91.303 and this lesson into all future flight reviews that I conduct; in addition to discussion I currently provide about maneuvering flight mishaps.bottom line; my major emphasis is to ensure flying will remain safe and to be a positive role model for all aviators that I come in contact with.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RV-7 pilot reported maneuvering over a congested area at 1;200 ft and later considered he may have violated FAR 91.303 with 'intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude' during the flight.

Narrative: Depending on how the FAA interprets FAR 91.303; I may have inadvertently performed what might be considered as aerobatic flight over a congested area. In the afternoon I was on my way to ZZZ airport to fly; I had a couple of friends ask me to fly over so they could see my aircraft in flight. Being well aware of the requirements Part 91.119; safe altitudes over congested areas; and also always wanting to be friendly to non-flying public who may not enjoy aircraft noise; I maintained an altitude allowing above 91.119 minimums. I had always assumed aerobatic flight to be linked to the angle of 30 degrees. As I flew over the house; I orbited at bank angles meeting Part 91.307 (c) and altitudes meeting Part 91.119. Prior to and during this time; I visually and electronically (TIS and ADS-B) cleared the area for other aircraft. Based on my proficiency (I used to fly USAF fighters very low level at 500+ knots) and currency; I considered all maneuvering was conducted safely and smoothly. I ensured that any flight exceeding the limits of Part 91.307 (c) was conducted over open fields and above 1500 feet; per Part 91.303. Later; while reviewing the FARs in preparation for conducting a biennial flight review; I realized that the bank and pitch angle limits I used for aerobatic flight were only stated in the paragraph for parachute requirements; and that aerobatic flight was defined as 'an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude; and abnormal attitude; or abnormal acceleration; not necessary for normal flight.' I am not certain what legally defines 'abrupt' changes or 'abnormal' attitudes; however; I expect the FAA to use the most conservative values; especially with their special emphasis on maneuvering flight; so that is why I am filing this [safety report].As a result; I am immediately implementing two changes to my flying:1) Restrict all flight over congested areas to a maximum of 30 degrees bank and <10 degrees of pitch.2) Stress wording of FAR 91.303 and this lesson into all future Flight Reviews that I conduct; in addition to discussion I currently provide about maneuvering flight mishaps.Bottom line; my major emphasis is to ensure flying will remain safe and to be a positive role model for all aviators that I come in contact with.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	1354339
Time
Date	201604
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	RV-7
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Cruise
Route In Use	None
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Function	Single Pilot
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 15 Flight Crew Total 4500 Flight Crew Type 220
Events
Anomaly	Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Rv-7 pilot reported maneuvering over a congested area at 1;200 ft and later considered he may have violated far 91.303 with 'intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude' during the flight.