Narrative:

This summer another pilot and I had planned to do a flyby of an event at a racetrack. We had planned to fly as a flight of two with me in lead at the other's pilot's insistence due to his 'better formation skill' than mine. We briefed to fly over the track at 250 KTS at greater than 500 ft AGL. I suggested in the briefing and planning for the flight that we should maintain 1000 ft AGL as I felt that this area would constitute a densely populated area under part 91 minimum altitude regulations but allowed the other pilot to override me as I did not feel confident enough in my position due to his greater experience (military fighter time; etc). This was a mistake and the key error on my part that allowed this event to occur. I should have been more confident in my experience (not military but extensive aerobatic competition with low level waivers in warbirds) and greater recent experience in tactical-type jets (the other pilot had not flown a similar aircraft in close to ten years before I trained him for his authorization in the L39). We departed as planned with a fuel stop. At the briefed time we took off; joined up and orbited to wait for the national anthem to start. As it started we began our planned run in to the north of the track; being careful to avoid the most densely populated areas and stay below 250 KTS. After the flyby we broke the flight into individual aircraft and circled the track; I stayed above 500 ft AGL and kept my bank angle under 60 degrees as we circled the track twice. We then rejoined and departed the area. I found out in the debrief that the other pilot had intentionally allowed his aircraft to descend to 300 ft AGL and had banked over 120 degrees at various points in the passes. My mistake in this instance was not seeing the warning signs of the other pilot's rogue behavior in a prior flight that month when we had planned to fly over his home in the far metropolitan suburbs at 500 ft during his L39 type training. On the passes he intentionally descended below 500 ft AGL and banked the aircraft excessively; I clearly felt we were doing aerobatics and were below far part 91 minimum altitudes. I told him to climb and ease off the bank angle which he did. In the debrief he was defensive and clearly felt I was not 'man enough' for what he was doing. At the time I should have realized he was an unsafe pilot and should have been more confident to stand up to him when he pushed for a flyby that I felt was below far minimum altitudes. I was reluctant to because we were involved in a business deal at the same time; which I have since called off. It was very poor airmanship on my part to allow business and my intimidation at his greater number of hours to influence my safety of flight decisions and I will not again.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An L-29 pilot reported that after landing from accomplishing a flyby; he learned the other formation pilot descended below 500 FT and banked sharply in a populated area.

Narrative: This summer another pilot and I had planned to do a flyby of an event at a racetrack. We had planned to fly as a flight of two with me in lead at the other's pilot's insistence due to his 'better formation skill' than mine. We briefed to fly over the track at 250 KTS at greater than 500 FT AGL. I suggested in the briefing and planning for the flight that we should maintain 1000 FT AGL as I felt that this area would constitute a densely populated area under part 91 minimum altitude regulations but allowed the other pilot to override me as I did not feel confident enough in my position due to his greater experience (military fighter time; etc). This was a mistake and the key error on my part that allowed this event to occur. I should have been more confident in my experience (not military but extensive aerobatic competition with low level waivers in warbirds) and greater recent experience in tactical-type jets (the other pilot had not flown a similar aircraft in close to ten years before I trained him for his authorization in the L39). We departed as planned with a fuel stop. At the briefed time we took off; joined up and orbited to wait for the National Anthem to start. As it started we began our planned run in to the north of the track; being careful to avoid the most densely populated areas and stay below 250 KTS. After the flyby we broke the flight into individual aircraft and circled the track; I stayed above 500 FT AGL and kept my bank angle under 60 degrees as we circled the track twice. We then rejoined and departed the area. I found out in the debrief that the other pilot had intentionally allowed his aircraft to descend to 300 FT AGL and had banked over 120 degrees at various points in the passes. My mistake in this instance was not seeing the warning signs of the other pilot's rogue behavior in a prior flight that month when we had planned to fly over his home in the far metropolitan suburbs at 500 FT during his L39 type training. On the passes he intentionally descended below 500 FT AGL and banked the aircraft excessively; I clearly felt we were doing aerobatics and were below FAR part 91 minimum altitudes. I told him to climb and ease off the bank angle which he did. In the debrief he was defensive and clearly felt I was not 'man enough' for what he was doing. At the time I should have realized he was an unsafe pilot and should have been more confident to stand up to him when he pushed for a flyby that I felt was below FAR minimum altitudes. I was reluctant to because we were involved in a business deal at the same time; which I have since called off. It was very poor airmanship on my part to allow business and my intimidation at his greater number of hours to influence my safety of flight decisions and I will not again.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.