FL,
I totally agree. My point is that a disgruntled landowner could easily claim that his property or person had been endangered. He didn't in this case, so all is well. However, from past experience it might not have been.
As I pointed out earlier, certain claims were made during my time as the chief pilot of a police helicopter unit, against us whilst carrying out the normal operation of our aircraft to and from the base helipad (over open fields, as it happened). The claims resulted in a warning letter from the CAA Legal Branch. I sent a reply pointing out that we were most definitely not in breach of Rule 5 and were, in any event, exempt from the relevant parts of it under the terms of our PAOC. No further action was taken.
A PPL might suffer more than a mere warning letter. I wonder what Royston would be writing if the landowner in his case had been as outraged by his landing as our "local friend" was.
No further mileage claims made, Royston.
120 hours a month as a Builder with a PPL. Now there's a mileage claim. I take it you are an hours builder
