Sid, you're only getting backlash from me over this is because you unfortunately waded in very strongly indeed and upset other contributors by your "I know better than you" attitude.
In my case, you made a patronising jibe at me by insuinuating I was an ignorant PPL hiring from a flying club in order to progress your argument. Later you tried to make out that I didn't know the basic rules of my job. As a professional pilot with almost forty years of aviation experience, I did take strong exception to this and so I gave you some back. If you "deal **it out" on a professional pilots' forum, then be prepared to get some back!
We are now in a situation where some of those holding the keys to our industry don't seem to know the law with regard to aviation as it stands. We are very aware of Op Pegasus; a rep has visited our base (we have a local SB rep). In some cases it appears that non-aviation folk such as hotel staff have been given the wrong impression by their local law enforcers. As I posted earlier, I recently rang a hotel to get management permission to land and was told that I would have to complete some paperwork. I was happy to do this, we routinely do it but in
this case a GAR was emailed to me, along with the requirement to complete it well in advance (actually more notice than is needed for an international flight). I was told this was so the local police could "approve" the flight! Total nonsense. I queried this and it was immediately referred back to the police by the hotel. Needless to say, I
will still be going to that hotel but with less detail being given.
My argument that giving out too much detail to persons unknown, in an uncontrolled security environment, is actually leaving us open to an aircraft hi-jack and is therefore counter-productive. Unless the police are going to meet every flight, check out the passengers and secure the landing site. We know the answer to that one.
If the law is changed and GAR completion in advance becomes mandatory for all internal flights, so be it, we'll have to do it, but it will cause corporate helicopter pilots like myself a big problem and I'll be the first to object. We know
all about the Olympics restrictions as it's highly likely to stop our ops to London for two months, our key "earner". A major London handling agent has recently advised staff that they will be laid off for the duration because GA flights will no longer be accepted. The helicopter industry is under huge pressure as it is, every time we turn and comply someone seems to put another obstacle in our way. As things are at the moment, an extra "security charge" of £1500 has recently been levied on every GA movement to LHR. This is on top of normal landing and handling fees. How many clients are going to pay this?
The only reason corporate helicopters exist at all is to provide clients with the ability to be highly flexible in where they go, at what time of day and who flies with them. The required passenger load does sometimes change at short notice, even at the point of passenger embarkation, in my case.
This is a legal right, whether you like it or not, that's the way it is, that's what we provide to make a living. That right is being eroded, little by little.
We are
all aware of the need to be constantly vigilant about security. I would say that I am very much so, perhaps more than your own department has shown itself to be (sorry about mentioning the arson attack but I couldn't resist that one). I'm afraid you haven't helped win any "hearts and minds" here by your sniping and attempts to put down anyone with a different viewpoint to your own.
All I ask is that you see my viewpoint without the petty sniping.
