Hello all, a little explanation is in order, I feel.
I subscribe to the Google Alert facility - I automatically get sent information of an air ambulance nature to my e-mail account. On this occasion, I felt that the information received was worthy of further dissemination. I cut and pasted the article, link and even the title (allowing myself journalistic licence only to add the word "again" in parentheses) before buggering off out for the evening.
The very first words in my initial post were "Near-miss" - impossible to misconstrue, thought I. All the post offered was a short piece, a facsimile of the BBC article - I offered no opinion, save for a wee angry red faced icon.
I returned home later that evening to discover that I had commited an appalling deed, an affront to the right thinking people of the world..
I must admit I still cannot understand the venom aimed at myself, the poster, solely based upon the original topic name (I see the topic name has now been altered, so 2STROPS, you have a moderator, not me, to thank.) I am missing something that obviously has infuriated several of you. Once again, I feel as though I must appologise that the aircraft did not collide!!!
Further research today has informed me that, as SilsoeSid alluded to earlier, the helicopter in question was on final approach to a charted HLS. It is all very well flying above 1500' if weather and tasking permit, but at some point one has to return to planet earth. If my intel is even half true, it would appear that the jet passed below the level of the air ambulance during short finals to its base. What flying profile should the helicopter have followed to mitigate this type of risk?? (I have also heard that this is by no means an isolated occurence at this particular HLS)
The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace
I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable
2STROPS, why are you prepared to just lie back and accept this situation.
One would hope that having a clearly defined HLS depicted on a flying chart would be enough warning for our pointy aviators, but your suggestion that the only way to be safe is for all air ambos move to licenced airfields implies that that is the smallest target the RAF can avoid. Get real! We have one of the finest air forces in the world - they ought to be able to cope with avoiding areas less than 5nm diameter. The air ambulances, police ,etc. have the right to be safe when OUTWITH an ATZ.
We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training
If it's realistic training they require, there are vast expanses of Canada, etc. If it's to be relevant, why not go play in the sand pit or Afghanistan. The likelihood of a Cold War style battle scenario in Eastern Europe looks rather low on the list of possibe futures the UK may face.....(Don't start me on European politics!)