Man, some of you guys are really in denial over this!
Steve76 (and others), the safety policies and attitudes of nations all over the world vary widely, and not all countries are diligent in keeping people safe. "FYI," I couldn't care less how they do it in any other country. In the U.S., which is where we're talking about, the government goes to great lengths to protect its people. It does that by enacting rules, regulations and laws the prescribe the way BUSINESSES do things. But even so, what ****** was doing would be categorized as "unsafe" in any country with even the teeniest regard for public safety.
Again, you are welcome to justify it all you want. Rest assured that if I ever walk up to a helicopter and see the pilot with a "Steve76" nametag, I will turn and run away and try to find a more professional pilot. Or at least one with a conscience.
Although the PPRuNe discussion boards are international in makeup, this particular accident happened in the U.S. So let's not judge it by the rules of ANY other country - let's use the rules that apply there. And the rules in the U.S. are quite clear: you don't subject fare-paying passengers in your aircraft to unreasonable risk (U.S. FAR 91.307 and 91.13), nor do you subject people on the ground to unreasonable risk (91.13). And you DEFINITELY do not kill anyone on the ground with your main rotor blades! I think any lawyer on the planet would call that prima facie evidence of negligence.
If you or **** or anyone else wishes to sue me, I say "bring it on!" Call me a liar...prove in court that what happened did not in fact happen...that a pilot wasn't hot-dogging negligently and repeatedly (in violation of numerous FAR's) and caused the death of a person on the ground. Bring it on!
The pics that TwinHueyMan posted make it appear that ******'s maneuvers required that everyone on board wear a parachute. Ref: U.S. FAR 91.307(c). It is apparent that he and his copilot are parachuteless.
And we condone this? Steve76, YOU condone all this? How much evidence do you guys need? The American FAA ought to be ashamed of itself for letting it go on.
To Labarynth Seal: Your unfortunate post was not referenced to anything else. Taken by itself, and with its placement in the thread, I very logically thought you were referring to the 412 incident. If you were not, then you have my apology.
To Sierra-Papa. You make a really BIG assumption when you say that the FAA/NTSB report is factual. It is not; it is only preliminary. And it is evidently inaccurate, judging by the written "testimony" of the passenger who was onboard the accident aircraft and the pictures of how Rockin' *** conducted his flights. But no matter. What does the "Ru" in PPRuNe stand for? Rumour, baby! Get over it.
The pictures of what ****** was doing are not "hearsay." They are not faked. They are very clear in what they depict. If you saw a picture of a person jumping out of a window, would you suggest we wait until all the facts are in before commenting on the fact that they died from a fall? 2 + 2 = ?.
But regardless of whether what ****** was doing was "legal" in the strictest sense of American law, and/or whether he had insurance to cover this is irrelevant. ****** had a moral obligation that goes higher than that. ALL pilots do. Dear God! We must not unreasonably endanger either the people riding with us or people on the ground. Playing weedeater with your 412 doesn't cut it, pardon the pun. Remember, that field was unsecured. What if there had been other "innocents" or people not directly related to the skydivers out there watching the festivities? If skydivers wanted a thrill-ride, they should've gone to Blackpool Pleasure Beach.
I hate to lecture you guys about how you should feel about this. But we SHOULD be outraged. And if any of you ever see *ME* doing the things of which we have pictorial evidence of ****** doing, I would hope that you'd conk me over the head...especially before I did the same to someone on the ground with my MAIN ROTOR blades. Instead of going out of our way to defend a pilot who did something indefensible, we all ought to be indignant that he "got away" with it for so long.
Last edited by Flare Dammit!; 13th September 2002 at 20:07.