View Full Version : amazing tourist attraction
hueyflight
2nd Nov 2008, 11:07
Anybody seen this movie clip already?
YouTube - Tour of Duty - Vietnam helicopter combat ride in Cape Town, South Africa (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1zLfv4pe3Q)
enjoy!
Bravo73
2nd Nov 2008, 14:27
Not for all the tea in China would I set foot in that Huey. :mad:
forget
2nd Nov 2008, 14:53
Not for all the tea in China would I set foot in that Huey.
Eh. What did I miss?
organ donor
2nd Nov 2008, 15:10
Don't think there is too much wrong with that heli, it is operated by Sport Helicopters and runs 'combat missions' for tourists. Another Company a number of years ago was the subject of much controversy, due to the manner in which it operated their Huey, doing much the same thing, and is no longer operating. That Huey is currently flying as a firefighting machine along with 8 other Hueys in South Africa, and the controversy died off following vigorous inspections by the SACAA on the aircraft.
birrddog
2nd Nov 2008, 15:29
The company that used to operate Hueys in Cape Town with all the controversy was Helicopter and Marine.
The Hueys were under ZU Reg (Experimental) and passengers had to buy "membership" in a club that allowed them to have the flight, charter not being possible on Experimental flights...
The owner of that company was also involved with Win Helicopters, which had the two Jet Rangers that crashed after being lashed together at the cargo hooks practicing a stunt for a tv show in 2002.
organ donor
2nd Nov 2008, 15:32
You are mixing up companies again. The video clip is not the WIN huey. WIN closed doors a couple of years ago, and another company saw the gap and are now doing the same thing as WIN did, with ZU aircraft.
The 'stunt' that went wrong was done through WIN, but I don't think the pilots that flew (briefly) worked for WIN, one of them certainly didn't.
birrddog
2nd Nov 2008, 15:48
You misread my post.
In my opening line I stated I was commenting on the previous company, as per your post, over which the controversy was about, not the "Sporty Helicopters".
Apologies if I was not clear enough.
organ donor
2nd Nov 2008, 16:13
no apology necessary, I was actually replying your previous post that you edited while I was typing mine.
Safe flying
B Sousa
2nd Nov 2008, 19:15
That Huey is currently flying as a firefighting machine along with 8 other Hueys in South Africa, and the controversy died off following vigorous inspections by the SACAA on the aircraft.
That controversy has never died. It utilized a gazillion posts on this site . http://www.pprune.org/african-aviation/246937-huey-capetown-including-huey-down.html The names of the companies have changed but the original players are doing the same old thing.
The original company was known as Helibase.
Sport Helicopters has a Huey and all is above board. Totally different company. Sport Helicopters at the V&A Waterfront (http://www.sport-helicopters.co.za/specialtours.html)
THE HUEY HELICOPTER CO. (http://www.thehueyhelicopterco.co.za/)
206Fan
2nd Nov 2008, 20:26
Not for all the tea in China would I set foot in that Huey
Either would i, he was that close to the water you could nearly fish for sharks!
wobble2plank
2nd Nov 2008, 20:45
Not for all the tea in China would I set foot in that Huey
Oh I don't know, he seemed to be well in control, low level over the sea but with the stored inertia in the Huey blades even an engine failure would have made the beach.
The Huey was designed for that sort of stuff and, after flying it in Germany, I absolutely loved it.
At least with this paying punters can join in the fun.
:D
B Sousa
3rd Nov 2008, 00:27
Suffice it to say BTDT in Capetown. All within the envelope for the Huey.
Funny thing when its a civilian doing it, its unsafe, but when we did it in the military it was called Normal Operations. Remember in the Military of today doctrine states that Helcopters own no airspace above 50'. Some in Iraq and Afghanistan have learned the hard way.
I also dont need to hear that in the military higher risk is acceptable behavior, its not.
Not for all the tea in China would I set foot in that Huey Not a problem, just a shorter waiting line for others....
darrenphughes
3rd Nov 2008, 03:01
Oooooh, that looks like fun. I wanna play too!!
wokkaboy
3rd Nov 2008, 13:19
I flew on it last year whilst on holiday and it was fantastic - thoroughly recommended :ok:
This type of operation is evidently acceptable in SA under "Part 24 Non-type certified aircraft" for the Airworthiness side and "Part 96 Commercial operation of non-type certified aircraft" for the Operational side.
It comes under "flipping" - flipping is defined as the carrying of fare-paying passengers for the purpose of sight-seeing, and such operations shall be restricted as follows:
(a) flights shall commence and end at the same aerodrome or helicopter landing site without any intermediate landing, and without any disembarking taking place by any means while the aircraft is in flight (parachute, rappelling, etc.);
(b) the duration of flights shall not exceed one hour of flight time;
(c) the number of passengers carried, whether fare-paying or carried for free, shall not exceed nine.
I guess it depends on many issues and the way the litigation laws are structured. I guess the passengers are informed before boarding the aircraft as to the limits of liability etc.
As to the conduct of the operation in the U Tube clip - another story again I guess.
Certainly a little different. Each to their own.