Narrative:

On may/xx/93, I flew our organization's aircraft following an extensive annual inspection. This flight was made from clark county airport, sellersburg, in. Following a routine series of functional checks, it was noted that intermittently there was a failure of the landing gear indicating system to display gear up and locked. I was in continual contact with our shop foreman by way of a hand-held ground-to-air radio as is our procedure for all test hops. I elected to fly to the side of our maintenance hangar at an altitude of 500 ft AGL. The hangar is remote from the rest of the airport and requires no fly-over of populated areas to do this. The fly-over was for our maintenance personnel to visually check gear door position. We had the gear doors off the airplane due to brake replacement in the annual inspection. Following the fly-over, I climbed the airplane to 1000 ft AGL prior to crossing any populated areas or the runway. This was followed by a normal pattern and landing. Clark county airport is an uncontrolled small airport and population surrounding the area is extremely sparse. The aircraft in question at no time was operated in an unsafe manner and the pattern was virtually clear of any and all airborne traffic. The fly-over was for maintenance purposes only and can be verified by our mechanics on site. After landing, an individual approached me and idented himself as an FAA inspector and that the fly-over was not to his liking, recommending that 1000 ft or greater would be better. He did not, however, notify me of any action or request. It is unknown if he understood the circumstances surrounding the situation. Our operation is extremely professional and fly-overs for any other reason are not condoned.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT TEST ACTIVITY IS CHALLENGED BY FAA INSPECTOR WHO THOUGHT THAT THE LOW ALT CIVIL OP WAS NOT THE CORRECT THING TO DO NEAR THIS ARPT.

Narrative: ON MAY/XX/93, I FLEW OUR ORGANIZATION'S ACFT FOLLOWING AN EXTENSIVE ANNUAL INSPECTION. THIS FLT WAS MADE FROM CLARK COUNTY ARPT, SELLERSBURG, IN. FOLLOWING A ROUTINE SERIES OF FUNCTIONAL CHKS, IT WAS NOTED THAT INTERMITTENTLY THERE WAS A FAILURE OF THE LNDG GEAR INDICATING SYS TO DISPLAY GEAR UP AND LOCKED. I WAS IN CONTINUAL CONTACT WITH OUR SHOP FOREMAN BY WAY OF A HAND-HELD GND-TO-AIR RADIO AS IS OUR PROC FOR ALL TEST HOPS. I ELECTED TO FLY TO THE SIDE OF OUR MAINT HANGAR AT AN ALT OF 500 FT AGL. THE HANGAR IS REMOTE FROM THE REST OF THE ARPT AND REQUIRES NO FLY-OVER OF POPULATED AREAS TO DO THIS. THE FLY-OVER WAS FOR OUR MAINT PERSONNEL TO VISUALLY CHK GEAR DOOR POS. WE HAD THE GEAR DOORS OFF THE AIRPLANE DUE TO BRAKE REPLACEMENT IN THE ANNUAL INSPECTION. FOLLOWING THE FLY-OVER, I CLBED THE AIRPLANE TO 1000 FT AGL PRIOR TO XING ANY POPULATED AREAS OR THE RWY. THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY A NORMAL PATTERN AND LNDG. CLARK COUNTY ARPT IS AN UNCTLED SMALL ARPT AND POPULATION SURROUNDING THE AREA IS EXTREMELY SPARSE. THE ACFT IN QUESTION AT NO TIME WAS OPERATED IN AN UNSAFE MANNER AND THE PATTERN WAS VIRTUALLY CLR OF ANY AND ALL AIRBORNE TFC. THE FLY-OVER WAS FOR MAINT PURPOSES ONLY AND CAN BE VERIFIED BY OUR MECHS ON SITE. AFTER LNDG, AN INDIVIDUAL APCHED ME AND IDENTED HIMSELF AS AN FAA INSPECTOR AND THAT THE FLY-OVER WAS NOT TO HIS LIKING, RECOMMENDING THAT 1000 FT OR GREATER WOULD BE BETTER. HE DID NOT, HOWEVER, NOTIFY ME OF ANY ACTION OR REQUEST. IT IS UNKNOWN IF HE UNDERSTOOD THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE SIT. OUR OP IS EXTREMELY PROFESSIONAL AND FLY-OVERS FOR ANY OTHER REASON ARE NOT CONDONED.

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.