tecpilot, I am entirely familiar with the FAA requirements for formulating and approving a congested area plan. The congested area plan is required to ensure that when performing external load operations in what might be determined a congested area, that NO hazard is created that would endanger people or property on the ground.
You would NOT get any kind of approval to fly external loads over the public, or over inhabited property (within certain mitigating considerations). As the same basic rule is applicable to ANY external load operation, then the FAA would not permit the operation that caused this accident.
Each flight must be conducted at an altitude, and on a route, that will allow a jettisonable external load to be released, and the rotorcraft landed, in an emergency without hazard to persons or property on the surface.
If this operation were to be carried out in a congested area, the plan would require that the cable car be shut down, and no-one who is not involved with the job, would be allowed within the work area. At NO time, would the FAA permit an external load to be carried over people. If this operation were to be carried out in a non congested area, the same criteria would be in effect, but the Operator would be responsible for ensuring compliance with the rule.
Don't tell me all the drivers that have slung loads have never flown over an obstacle, that if the load had released for whatever reason, could have caused death or destruction
I am quite genuinely shocked at the attitude of some of the posters here to flying loads over people. If we don't have a clear line of flight that does not overfly people or populated buildings, we wouldn't even consider flying it.
Ever wonder why the move to tanks over buckets is occurring in urban interface fires?