squeaks. depending on which operation you are working for and which what is in the ops manual will depend on which part of the sortie comes under which category.
There is no blanket approval that all media ops are considered AWK. Generally speaking the leg home (after landing for a stand-up/interview etc) is considered CHTR (unless of course you're filming on the way home, once again all ops manuals are different). The AWK component are the legs that involve aerial filming without landing. All ops manuals (non networked owned machines and network employed pilots) that I have flown media ops specifically state this so there's no confusion as to what role equipment is required (eg floats for overwater etc) that's why I'm asking what was in Gary's ops manual (I haven't read it).
Yes I know about the twin rules at night. I may have made the assumption that gary was instrumented rated as well as the machine.
That still doesn't answer my original question re; ground lighting from the departure point.
Summing up;
- Was the aircraft operated under Gary's AOC or was it a PVT operation ie, network owned machine and network paid pilot (helps to ascertain the category type)?
- What (if any) ground lighting was there on departure?
- Were they filming on the leg home?
- Did Gary own the machine or did ABC?
- If operating under Gary's AOC, then what does their ops manual say with regard to differentiating between CHTR and AWK specifically media/filming ops (for all I know CASA may have approved their ops manual that stipulates that all media operations are considered AWK however I doubt it)? Again helps to ascertain the category type.
Squeaks. Not all media operations are the same, a lot depends on who's AOC you're operating under and what their ops manual says. I think you're misinterpreting that I'm speculating on the cause of the accident, as you have suggested it may well have been a birdstrike or not. I'm pointing out that I don't think they should have been there in the first place.
Squeaks you keep saying that I have a lack of understanding of helicopter regs I have never professed to being the ruling authority here, I have merely been asking questions. Maybe it is you that have a lack of exposure to more than one media operation/AOC holder perhaps? I have flown for CH7 under three different operators/regimes, CH9 under two operators/regimes all of which were a mix of commercial companies and for the network directly. Each had very different requirements and considerations for planning/operating.
**
but (another red herring) as a privately owned helicopter flying for the owner it could have legally been a private flight if it was a positioning flight from one area to another.
What were commercial pax doing on board then? Was the journo/cammo paid/employed by Gary or by ABC?
There's been more than a few occasions where media operations under this type of arrangement (read; not network owned helicopters and network employed pilots) that have left the journo/cammo at the scene and flown home empty at night and picked them up the next day or have just stayed overnight at the location.