Airshow pilot participant made unauthorized low passes over runway during an airshow.

Attributes
ACN	213716
Time
Date	199206
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : 3ck
State Reference	IL
Altitude	agl bound lower : 10 agl bound upper : 10
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Fighter
Flight Phase	other
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 6000 flight time type : 500
ASRS Report	213716
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	observation : air carrier inspector
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	non adherence other other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : investigated faa : assigned or threatened penalties
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

My aircraft took off for the aerobatic flight demonstration. Upon completion of the aerobatic maneuvers, the show boss requested an extension of the flight demonstration, to eliminate the long void until the next and final demonstration. I requested 2 low approachs on the runway to extend the flight time. These were approved by the show boss via radio. The 2 low approachs then were flown on the runway centerline in both directions and flown at low cruise power in order to extend the flight time to the maximum. Upon completion of the 2 passes on the runway centerline, I called inbound. I then landed, thus completing my flight demonstration. The above was a chronological narration of pertinent events that took place at the show site. 4 days later I received a call from the FAA monitor of the show. He claimed that I had flown my aircraft too close to the spectator line. My reply and understanding was that the runway centerline was not too close and allowable for non-aerobatic fly-bys as no restriction was noted in the waiver for non-aerobatic fly-bys. I further commented that the aerobatic portion was flown at the designated distance from the crowd per the waiver. The FAA monitor stated that this was not correct and that this issue would be resolved at a later date. My contention is that the waiver does not preclude non-aerobatic fly-bys on the runway, as long as all the provisions are met. Additionally, I had flown this same show site in 1989 and 1990, with FAA monitors present and I had flown the same flight program with the non-aerobatic fly-bys without comment or restriction. Further, 4 prior aircraft used the runway centerline for aerobatic and non-aerobatic demonstrations without restriction (per the narration). Should this be an improper flight procedure per the provisions of the waiver, the waiver should have contained definitions for the allowed maneuvers to be conducted over the runway centerline. This restriction should have been presented to all the pilots at the pre-show briefing and included in the written waiver provided to each pilot. Had the FAA monitor introduced himself as the attending monitor and thus presented the runway restrictions, no ambiguity would have existed on the allowable flight maneuvers over the runway centerline.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AIRSHOW PLT PARTICIPANT MADE UNAUTHORIZED LOW PASSES OVER RWY DURING AN AIRSHOW.

Narrative: MY ACFT TOOK OFF FOR THE AEROBATIC FLT DEMONSTRATION. UPON COMPLETION OF THE AEROBATIC MANEUVERS, THE SHOW BOSS REQUESTED AN EXTENSION OF THE FLT DEMONSTRATION, TO ELIMINATE THE LONG VOID UNTIL THE NEXT AND FINAL DEMONSTRATION. I REQUESTED 2 LOW APCHS ON THE RWY TO EXTEND THE FLT TIME. THESE WERE APPROVED BY THE SHOW BOSS VIA RADIO. THE 2 LOW APCHS THEN WERE FLOWN ON THE RWY CTRLINE IN BOTH DIRECTIONS AND FLOWN AT LOW CRUISE PWR IN ORDER TO EXTEND THE FLT TIME TO THE MAX. UPON COMPLETION OF THE 2 PASSES ON THE RWY CTRLINE, I CALLED INBOUND. I THEN LANDED, THUS COMPLETING MY FLT DEMONSTRATION. THE ABOVE WAS A CHRONOLOGICAL NARRATION OF PERTINENT EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE SHOW SITE. 4 DAYS LATER I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE FAA MONITOR OF THE SHOW. HE CLAIMED THAT I HAD FLOWN MY ACFT TOO CLOSE TO THE SPECTATOR LINE. MY REPLY AND UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THE RWY CTRLINE WAS NOT TOO CLOSE AND ALLOWABLE FOR NON-AEROBATIC FLY-BYS AS NO RESTRICTION WAS NOTED IN THE WAIVER FOR NON-AEROBATIC FLY-BYS. I FURTHER COMMENTED THAT THE AEROBATIC PORTION WAS FLOWN AT THE DESIGNATED DISTANCE FROM THE CROWD PER THE WAIVER. THE FAA MONITOR STATED THAT THIS WAS NOT CORRECT AND THAT THIS ISSUE WOULD BE RESOLVED AT A LATER DATE. MY CONTENTION IS THAT THE WAIVER DOES NOT PRECLUDE NON-AEROBATIC FLY-BYS ON THE RWY, AS LONG AS ALL THE PROVISIONS ARE MET. ADDITIONALLY, I HAD FLOWN THIS SAME SHOW SITE IN 1989 AND 1990, WITH FAA MONITORS PRESENT AND I HAD FLOWN THE SAME FLT PROGRAM WITH THE NON-AEROBATIC FLY-BYS WITHOUT COMMENT OR RESTRICTION. FURTHER, 4 PRIOR ACFT USED THE RWY CTRLINE FOR AEROBATIC AND NON-AEROBATIC DEMONSTRATIONS WITHOUT RESTRICTION (PER THE NARRATION). SHOULD THIS BE AN IMPROPER FLT PROC PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE WAIVER, THE WAIVER SHOULD HAVE CONTAINED DEFINITIONS FOR THE ALLOWED MANEUVERS TO BE CONDUCTED OVER THE RWY CTRLINE. THIS RESTRICTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO ALL THE PLTS AT THE PRE-SHOW BRIEFING AND INCLUDED IN THE WRITTEN WAIVER PROVIDED TO EACH PLT. HAD THE FAA MONITOR INTRODUCED HIMSELF AS THE ATTENDING MONITOR AND THUS PRESENTED THE RWY RESTRICTIONS, NO AMBIGUITY WOULD HAVE EXISTED ON THE ALLOWABLE FLT MANEUVERS OVER THE RWY CTRLINE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.