Narrative:

These are my accounts of events to the allegation of having violated far 91.119. Minimum safe altitudes, as witnessed by an inspector on the ground on feb/xx/98. It was requested of me to fly over the town of corona during my duty flight time. I followed highway 91 towards the east from the long beach airport. Approaching the town of corona there is a mountain pass, I had to fly over the highway, perhaps lower than I wanted due to ballonet limitations. Abeam ajo, I tuned to AWOS, obtained an altimeter reading, contacted unicom frequency, informed traffic of my presence and intentions and proceeded via highway 91 into city limits. I formed a grid pattern (north and south, east and west) to maximum exposure in the allotted time. All this time radio watch maintained within visual range. I came upon the business district and circled and hovered over various stores in the area. Recognizing that I had been in the area for such a long time I extended my track into the next town, over another hill pass with housing on it. I circled it once and returned to corona. Throughout the day my ballonet indicated 2-2.5 maximum and it caused the excess material to be sucked into the fan. Over the 2 hour period I probably had to nose it over 5-6 times, to clear it. This could easily explain my dramatic nose pitch down and upward. It was perhaps during these periods of operation, in conjunction with the rising terrain in the area, that I may have operated below the minimum safe altitude for that area. It is my belief that at no time I endangered any lives or property below me. I may be new to airship flying, however, I uphold my flying standard to that of an airline transport pilot, and if I broke this rule, it was not intentional and it shall not happen again. An FAA inspector witnessed this event and is charging me with careless and reckless operation and not complying with minimum safe altitudes, even though he was more than 5 mi away from where I was operating. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the FAA had sent him a letter of investigation of this incident to which he has responded. He had since researched the normal altitude estimate given by ground observers to him when he was at various altitudes and found most estimates did indicate him to be as much as 1200 ft lower than he actually was. This illusion is caused by the large size of blimp which is 138 ft long with a 48 ft diameter. He further stated that the ballonet material does not actually get caught in the fan, but blocks the air inlet for air for ballast.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN ADVERTISING LIGHTER THAN AIR-AIRSHIP (BLIMP) WAS ACCUSED BY AN FAA INSPECTOR OBSERVER OF OPERATING AT LOWER THAN THE MINIMUM SAFE ALT OVER A CONGESTED AREA AND IN A CARELESS AND RECKLESS MANNER. ACCORDING TO THE RPTR HE DID HAVE TO MAKE DRAMATIC NOSE DOWN AND UP PITCH ATTITUDE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS TO CLR THE BLIMP'S BALLONET FROM THE FAN AND AS A RESULT MAY HAVE DSNDED BELOW THE MINIMUM SAFE ALT.

Narrative: THESE ARE MY ACCOUNTS OF EVENTS TO THE ALLEGATION OF HAVING VIOLATED FAR 91.119. MINIMUM SAFE ALTS, AS WITNESSED BY AN INSPECTOR ON THE GND ON FEB/XX/98. IT WAS REQUESTED OF ME TO FLY OVER THE TOWN OF CORONA DURING MY DUTY FLT TIME. I FOLLOWED HWY 91 TOWARDS THE E FROM THE LONG BEACH ARPT. APCHING THE TOWN OF CORONA THERE IS A MOUNTAIN PASS, I HAD TO FLY OVER THE HWY, PERHAPS LOWER THAN I WANTED DUE TO BALLONET LIMITATIONS. ABEAM AJO, I TUNED TO AWOS, OBTAINED AN ALTIMETER READING, CONTACTED UNICOM FREQ, INFORMED TFC OF MY PRESENCE AND INTENTIONS AND PROCEEDED VIA HWY 91 INTO CITY LIMITS. I FORMED A GRID PATTERN (N AND S, E AND W) TO MAX EXPOSURE IN THE ALLOTTED TIME. ALL THIS TIME RADIO WATCH MAINTAINED WITHIN VISUAL RANGE. I CAME UPON THE BUSINESS DISTRICT AND CIRCLED AND HOVERED OVER VARIOUS STORES IN THE AREA. RECOGNIZING THAT I HAD BEEN IN THE AREA FOR SUCH A LONG TIME I EXTENDED MY TRACK INTO THE NEXT TOWN, OVER ANOTHER HILL PASS WITH HOUSING ON IT. I CIRCLED IT ONCE AND RETURNED TO CORONA. THROUGHOUT THE DAY MY BALLONET INDICATED 2-2.5 MAX AND IT CAUSED THE EXCESS MATERIAL TO BE SUCKED INTO THE FAN. OVER THE 2 HR PERIOD I PROBABLY HAD TO NOSE IT OVER 5-6 TIMES, TO CLR IT. THIS COULD EASILY EXPLAIN MY DRAMATIC NOSE PITCH DOWN AND UPWARD. IT WAS PERHAPS DURING THESE PERIODS OF OP, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RISING TERRAIN IN THE AREA, THAT I MAY HAVE OPERATED BELOW THE MINIMUM SAFE ALT FOR THAT AREA. IT IS MY BELIEF THAT AT NO TIME I ENDANGERED ANY LIVES OR PROPERTY BELOW ME. I MAY BE NEW TO AIRSHIP FLYING, HOWEVER, I UPHOLD MY FLYING STANDARD TO THAT OF AN AIRLINE TRANSPORT PLT, AND IF I BROKE THIS RULE, IT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL AND IT SHALL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. AN FAA INSPECTOR WITNESSED THIS EVENT AND IS CHARGING ME WITH CARELESS AND RECKLESS OP AND NOT COMPLYING WITH MINIMUM SAFE ALTS, EVEN THOUGH HE WAS MORE THAN 5 MI AWAY FROM WHERE I WAS OPERATING. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE FAA HAD SENT HIM A LETTER OF INVESTIGATION OF THIS INCIDENT TO WHICH HE HAS RESPONDED. HE HAD SINCE RESEARCHED THE NORMAL ALT ESTIMATE GIVEN BY GND OBSERVERS TO HIM WHEN HE WAS AT VARIOUS ALTS AND FOUND MOST ESTIMATES DID INDICATE HIM TO BE AS MUCH AS 1200 FT LOWER THAN HE ACTUALLY WAS. THIS ILLUSION IS CAUSED BY THE LARGE SIZE OF BLIMP WHICH IS 138 FT LONG WITH A 48 FT DIAMETER. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE BALLONET MATERIAL DOES NOT ACTUALLY GET CAUGHT IN THE FAN, BUT BLOCKS THE AIR INLET FOR AIR FOR BALLAST.

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.